Skip to main content

Full text of "The works of the Most Reverend Father in God, William Laud, sometime Lord Archbishop of Canterbury"

See other formats







WILLIAM     LAUD,    D.D. 


VOL.  IV. 




THE  present  volume  contains  the  remaining  portion  of 
the  Archbishop's  History,  including  the  narrative  of  his 
Trial,  day  by  day.  There  will  be  found  in  the  notes,  besides 
the  usual  biographical  notices,  very  large  extracts  from  the 
Journals  of  the  Houses  of  Lords  and  Commons,  either 
illustrative  and  confirmatory  of  the  Archbishop's  statements, 
or  else  carrying  on  more  minutely  than  he  was  able  to  do, 
the  details  of  his  history,  towards  its  melancholy  close. 

The  remainder  of  the  volume  contains  the  following 
additional  documents  :  (1)  A  fuller  account  of  the  Arch 
bishop's  death,  from  Rushworth  and  Heylin ;  (2)  his  dying 
Speech ;  (3)  his  last  Will  and  Testament,  reprinted  from  the 
edition  published  by  John  Bruce,  Esq.,  in  his  account  of 
the  Archbishop's  Berkshire  benefactions ;  (4)  illustrative 
extracts  from  the  Conference  with  Fisher,  and  other  books 
referred  to  in  the  preceding  History ;  (5)  Rome's  Master- 

All  these,  with  the  exception  of  the  more  complete  edition 
of  the  Will,  are  simple  reprints  of  Henry  Wharton's  edition. 


The  Answer  to  the  Lord  Say  and  Selo's  Speech,  and 
the  Archbishop's  Annual  Accounts  of  his  Province,  which 
were  also  inserted  by  Wharton,  as  part  of  the  Appendix 
to  the  History,  appear  elsewhere  in  this  edition. 


Dec.  19,  1853. 



I.  History  of  Troubles  and  Trial  (continued)   .                             1 

IT.  Supplement  to  the  History,  from  Rushworth  and  Heylin     420 

III.  The  Archbishop's  Dying  Speech  ....     430 

IV.  His  Last  Will  and  Testament      .         .         .         .         .441 
V.  Appendix  of  Illustrative  Extracts,  by  H.  Wharton         .     452 

VI.  Rome's  Master-Piece                                                               403 




192  CAP.  XIV. 

ST.  LEONARD'S,  Foster-Lane,  London,  is  in  the  gift  of  the 
Dean  and  Chapter  of  Westminster.  Mr.  William  Ward  the 
Incumbent  had  resigned,  and  besides  was  censured  by  a 
Committee  in  Parliament,  for  innovations,  and  I  know  not 
whata.  One  Mr.  George  Smith  was  tendered  (it  seems)  to 
the  Dean  and  Chapter  of  Westminster.  How  things  were 
carried  there,  I  know  not ;  but  they  let  their  living  fall  in  lapse 
to  the  Ld.  Bishop  of  London.  His  six  months  likewise  were 
suffered  to  slide  over,  and  the  benefice  was  lapsed  to  me,  as 
Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  about  March  the  3d.  In  all  this  Mart.  3, 
time  Mr.  Ward  had  not  the  providence  l  to  seek  to  the  King 
for  remedy,  or  to  the  original  patrons,  whose  presentation  at 
any  time  before  the  Bishop  had  filled  the  Church,  was  (as 
I  am  informed)  good  in  law. 

This  benefice  being  now  in  my  dispose,  the  precise  part  of 
the  parish  petition  the  Parliament  for  the  aforesaid  Mr.  George 

1  'prudence' 

a  [Ward  had  given  offence  to  the  on  his  sequestration,  where  it  is  said 

Parliament  by  having  denounced  the  he  died  for  want.   (Lloyd's  Worthies, 

Scots  as  traitors  in  a  concio  ad  clerum  p.  508.)] 
at  Sion  College.    He  retired  to  Oxford 

LAUD. — VOL.  iv. 


Smith;  and  by  the  means  of  my  Lord  Kimbolton1'  (a  great 
patron  of  such  men)  obtain  this  Order  following  :— 

"Die  Jovis,  17  Martii,  1641. 

"  Upon  the  reading  of  the  Petition  of  the  parishioners  of 
St.  Leonard's,  Foster-Lane,  London,  it  is  ordered  by  the  Lords 
in  Parliament,  that  Mr.  George  Smith,  elected  and  approved 
by  the  Dean  of  Westminster,  and  the  parishioners  of  St. 
Leonard's,  Foster-Lane,  be  especially  recommended  to  the 
Ld.  Archbp.  of  Canterbury  his  Grace  from  this  (86)  House, 
that  the  said  Mr.  Smith  may  be  forthwith  presented  to  the 
parish  church  of  the  said  St.  Leonard. 

"  JOHN  BROWN,  Clericus  Parliament" 

Mar.  19,  This  order  was  brought  me  by  the  Churchwardens,  and 
some  of  the  parish,  on  Saturday,  March  19.  I  was  sorry  for 
the  honest  Incumbent's  sake,  Mr.  Ward;  and  troubled  in 
myself  to  have  such  an  order  sent  me  :  especially,  considering 
that  the  Lords'  former  order c  (though,  as  I  was  1  informed, 
against  all  law,  yet)  was  so  moderate  as  to  suffer  me  to  nomi 
nate  to  benefices,  so  that  the  men  were  without  exception. 
I  put  them  off  till  Monday.  In  the  meantime  I  advised  with 
my  learned  counsel,  and  other  friends.  All  of  them  agreed 
in  this  ;  That  it  was  a  great  and  a  violent  injustice  put  upon 
me ;  yet  in  regard  of  the  time,  and  my  condition,  they 
persuaded  me  to  give  way  to  their  power,  and  present  their 

Mar.  21,  On  Monday,  Mar.  21,  they  repaired  to  me  again:  I  sent 
them  to  my  Register,  to  draw  a  presentation  according  to  the 
Order  of  Parliament,  and  advised  them  while  that  was  in 
drawing,  to  send  Mr.  Smith  to  me.  One  of  them  told  me 
very  boldly,  that  it  was  not  in  the  Order  of  Parliament,  that 
Mr.  Smith  should  come  to  me ;  and  another  told  me  2  that 
Mr.  Smith  would  not  come  to  me.  Upon  this  unworthy  usage 
of  me,  I  dismissed  them  again,  having  first,  in  obedience  to 
the  order,  sealed  and  set  my  hand  to  the  presentation,  ready 
for  delivery  when  Mr.  Smith  came  for  it.  193 

1  ['  was'  originally  written  '  am ']  2  ['  told  me  '  on  opposite  page.] 

b  [Edward  Montagu,  the  eldest  son          c  P.  81  [of  original  MS.     See  vol. 
of  the  Earl  of  Manchester.]  iii.  p.  451.] 


The  next  morning  these  men  repair  again  to  the  Lords' 
House,  and  on  Wednesday,  Mar.  23,  procure  another  order  d,  Mar  23 
strictly  commanding  me  forthwith  to  deliver  the  presentation  I64f . 
to  the  parishioners1. 

This  order  being  settled,  the  E.  of  Holland6  made  a  motion, 
and  put  the  Lords  in  mind  that  I  lay  under  a  heavy  charge, 
and  had  long  lain  so :  that  it  would  be  honourable  for  the 
Parliament  to  bring  my  cause  to  hearing,  that  so  I  might 
receive  punishment  if 2  I  were  found  to  deserve  it 3,  or  other 
wise  have  some  end  of  my  troubles.  There  was  a  great  dis 
pute  among  my  friends,  quo  ammo,  with  what  mind  this  Ld. 
moved  it,  especially  then,  when  almost  all  my  friends  in  both 
Houses  were  absent.  Howsoever  I  took  it  for  the  best, 
desiring  nothing  more  than  an  end ;  and  therefore  sent  a  gen 
tleman  the  next  day  to  give  his  Lp.  thanks  for  his  nobleness 
in  remembering  me.  And  if  he  did  it  with  an  ill  mind,  God 
forgive  him,  and  preserve  me.  But  whatsoever  his  Lp.'s 
intent  was,  his  motion,  after  some  debate,  begat  a  message  to 
the  House  of  Commons,  to  ripen  my  business f;  but  it  died 
again,  arid  nothing  done. 

The  order  last  above  written,  concerning  Mr.  Smith,  the 
parishioners  brought  to  me  the  same  day  in  the  afternoon. 
It  happened  that  the  L.  Primate  of  Armagh  %  was  then  with 
me.  I  showed  him  the  order,  and  he  blessed  himself  to  see 
it ;  yet  advised  me  to  obey,  as  my  other  friends  had  done.  I 
further  desired  him  to  stay  and  hear  my  answer  to  them, 
which  was  this :  That  I  knew  not  what  report  they  had  made 

1  [A  passage  is  here  erased,  of  which  only  the  first  few  words  are  legible, 
*  The  Ld.  Kimbolton  saying  Mr.  Smith '] 

2  ['receive  ...  if '  on  opposite  page.]  3  ['it,'  interlined.] 

d  ["  Ordered,  that  the  Lord  Arch-  whereby  the  Church  is  still  troubled, 

bishop  of  Cant,  shall  forthwith  confer  notwithstanding  his  imprisonment  in 

the  presentation  of  St.  Leonard's,  Fos-  the  Tower  of  London,  that  the  House 

ter  Lane,  according  to  a  former  order  of  Commons  might  be  sent  to,  to  be 

of  this  House,  dated  the  17th  of  this  desired  that  they  would  proceed  to 

instant  March,  upon  Mr.  George  Smith,  make  good  their  impeachment  of  high 

Clerk,  and  that  his  Grace  shall  forth-  treason  against  him,  that  so  he  might 

with  deliver  the  said  presentation  unto  receive    judgment  according   to    his 

the  Churchwardens  or  parishioners  of  demerit ;    and  likewise   to  move  the 

that  parish."]  House  of  Commons,  that  they  would 

•e  [Henry  llich.]  proceed  against  the  rest  of  the  delin- 

f   ["  It  was  moved,  That  considering  quents   with  what   conveniency  they 

the  power  which   the  Archbishop  of  may."] 

Cant,  hath  in   ecclesiastical  matters,  «  [James  Ussher.] 

B   2 


of  me  and  my  obedience  to  the  Lords ;  and  that  therefore  I 
would  give  their  Lps.  in  writing  an  account  of  my  proceed 
ings1  ;  but  would  deliver  the  presentation  to  Mr.  Smith  when 
he  came.  The  Ld.  Primate  cried  shame  of  them  to  their 
faces ;  so  they  went  away. 

Mar.  -21,  Qn  Thursday,  March  24,  in  an  humble  petition  I  informed 
the  Lords  how  ready  I  was  to  obey ;  only  desired  that  Mr. 
Smith  might  come  to  me,  that  I  might  see  his  orders,  and 
examine  his  sufficiency ;  to  both  which  I  stood  bound  both 
in  conscience  and  by  law.  Upon  reading  of  this  petition, 
some  Lords  said  Mr.  Smith  was  an  unmannerly  fellow,  not 
to  come  to  me ;  but  the  L.  Kimboltoii  told  them  he  was  a 
very  worthy  man,  and  that  he  might  go  to  me  afterward ; 
but  it  was  fit  their  order  should  be  obeyed.  And  the  E.  of 
Warwick11  added,  that  I  desired  Mr.  Smith  (87)  might  come 
to  me,  only  that  I  might  pick  a  quarrel  with  him,  to  frustrate 
the  order  of  the  House.  Upon  this  there  followed  instantly 
a  peremptory  order,  commanding  me  to  present  obedience1. 
So  Mr.  Smith  was  left  to  come  to  me  afterwards,  if  he  pleased; 
and  he  came  not  at  all,  which  was  as  good  as  if  he  had  come, 
to  have  his  sufficiency  examined  for  that  which  he  had 
already  in  possession.  But  how  worthy  and  fit  he  proved,  I 
refer  to  all  honest  men  that  heard  him  afterwards k. 

Upon  this  order,  according  to  the  former  advice  of  my 
friends l,  I  delivered  the  presentation  to  the  churchwardens 
and  parishioners ;  and  if  anything  proved  amiss  in  the  man, 
(as  after  did  in  a  high  measure,)  or  hurtful  in  the  thing  itself, 
I  humbly  besought  God  to  have  mercy  on  me,  and  to  call 
for  an  account  of  them  who  laid  this  pressure  upon  me. 

1   [Originally  '  proceedings  herein ;'] 

'Rob.  "Rich.]  year.  On  his  death  he  was  succeeded 
["  Upon  reading  the  petition  of  by  James  Nalton,  who  was  appointed, 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  it  is  April  13,  1643,  "ad  recommcndatio- 
ordered,  That  he  shall  confer  forth-  nemsivenoniinationem  honorabilium 
with  the  presentation  of  St.  Leonard's  Virorum  Dominorum  in  suprema  cu- 
Foster  Lane,  upon  George  Smith,  Clerk,  ria  Parliament!  congregatorum,  juxta 
according  to  former  orders  of  this  ordinem  in  ea  parte  editam."  (New- 
House."]  court,  Report,  vol.  i.  p.  395.)] 

k  [Smith,  who  was  instituted  April  >  [P.  86  (of  orig.  MS.)     Sec  above, 

19,  1642,  held  this  benefice  only  fur  a  p.  3.] 


194  CAP.  XV. 

BEFORE  '  this  time  the  rectory  of  Stisted  in  Essex  was  fallen 
void,  and  in  my  gift.  The  E.  of  Warwick  was  an  earnest 
suitor  to  me  for  it,  for  one  Mr.  Clark  :  I  delayed,  having  six 
months'  time  by  law  to  dispose  of  my  benefices.  During  this 
delay,  Mr.  Richard  Hewlett,  a  bachelor  of  divinity,  and  a 
man  of  very  good  worth,  a  dean  in  Ireland a,  was  by  the 
rebels  there  turned  out  of  all  he  had,  and  forced,  for  safety 
of  his  life,  to  come  with  his  wife  and  children  into  England  : 
his  wife  was  my  near  kinswoman b.  At  their  coming  over  I 
was  forced  to  relieve  them,  else  they  might  have  begged. 
Hereupon  I  resolved  in  myself  to  give  Stisted  to  Mr.  Hewlett, 
and  to  gratify  Mr.  Clark  with  something  after;  nothing 
doubting  but  that  the  Parliament  would  readily  give  way  in 
such  a  case  of  necessity,  for  so  worthy  a  man  as  Mr.  Hewlett 
was  known  to  be. 

While  these  things  were  in  my  thoughts,  two  other  great 
benefices  fell  into  my  disposal,  Booking,  and  Lachingdon, 
both  in  Essex.  Presently  the  parishioners  petition  me; 
they  of  Booking  for  Dr.  Gawdenc,  a  chaplain  of  the  E.  of 
Warwick's;  they  of  Lachingdon,  that  they  might  choose 
their  own  minister.  I  gave  a  fair  answer  to  both,  but  reserved 
myself.  Then  I  was  pressed  with  letters  from  the  E.  of 
Warwick,  for  Dr.  Gawden.  My  answer  was,  I  could  not 
gratify  Dr.  Gawden  with  Bocking,  and  Mr.  Clark  with 
Stisted.  Then  Dr.  Gawden  brings  me  a  very  earnest  letter, 
but  very  honourable,  from  the  E.  of  Hertford11.  When  I  saw 


1  ['  Before  '  originally  '  By'] 

a   [Installed    as    Dean   of    Cashel,  b  [See  the    Archbishop's  letter  to 

March  9, 163f ,  in  the  place  of  William  Bp.  Bramhall,  Aug.  11,  1638.] 

Chappell,  appointed  Bp.  of  Cork.   He  c  [Gawden  retained  this  preferment 

had  been  the  tutor  of  Bramhall   at  during  the  Rebellion,  and  at  the  Resto- 

Sidney  Sussex   College,  and  also   of  ration  was  appointed  successively  Bp. 

Oliver  Cromwell  (Wood,  F.  0.  ii.  153).  of  Exeter  and  Worcester.] 

The  names  of  some  of  his  other  pupils  <l  [William  Seymour,  eleventh  Earl 

are  mentioned  below.]  and  first  Marquis  of  Hertford.] 


myself  thus  pressed,  I  resolved  to  name  fit  men  to  all  three 
benefices,  presently,  and  see  how  the  Parliament  would  be 
pleased  to  deal  with  me. 

Before  I  did  this,  I  thought  fit  to  make  a  fair  offer  to  the 
E.  of  Warwick,  who  by  Dr.  Gawden's  entreaty  came  to  me 
to  the  Tower.  I  freely  told  his  Lp.  my  resolution,  which 
was,  that  at  the  desire  of  his  Lp.,  and  my  honourable  friend 
the  L.  Marquess  of  Hertford,  I  would  give  Bocking  to  Dr. 
Gawden ;  Lachingdon  to  Mr.  Howlett,  in  regard  of  his  alliance 
to  me,  and  his  present  necessities ;  and  Stisted  to  Mr.  New- 
stede,  to  whom  I  was  pre-engaged  by  promise  to  my  ancient 
worthy  friend,  Sir  Tho.  Rowef,  whom  Mr.  Newsted  had  served 
in  his  embassages  seven  years;  and  for  Mr.  Clark,  he 
should  have  the  next  benefice  which  fell  in  my  gift,  for  his 
Lp/s  sake.  His  Lp.  seemed  to  be  very  much  taken  with 
this  offer  of  mine,  and  promised  me,  and  gave  me  his  hand 
upon  it,  that  he  would  do  me  all  the  kindness  he  could,  that 
these  my  nominations  might  pass  with  the  Lords. 

Mar.  31,  Upon  this  I  rested,  and  according  to  my  promise,  petitioned 
the  Lords,  as  is  expressed.  Upon  the  reading  of  this  petition, 
the  Lords  ordered  me  presently  to  collate  Bocking  upon  Dr. 

April  1,  Gawden;  which  I  did,  the  order  being  brought  unto  me  the 
next  day?.  But  for  the  other  two,  the  Lords  took  time  to 
consider.  The  E.  of  Warwick  was  then  present  in  the  House, 
and,  as  I  was  informed,  said  little  or  nothing.  This  made  195 
me  fear  the  worst;  and  therefore  I  advised  Mr.  Howlett  to 
get  a  full  certificate  of  the  L.  Primate  of  Armagh,  both  for 

c  [Christopher  Newstead  was  Vicar  conceives  to  be   deserving  men  for 

of  St.Helen's,  Abingdon,  June  21, 1629  those  places,  and  desires  their  Lord- 

(Rymer,  Feed.  VIII.  iii.  84);  Rector  of  ships' approbation  of  them  before  he 

Halingbury,  June  1,  1636  (ibid.  IX.  presents. 

ii.  88) ;  and  Preb.  of  Caddington  Minor  "  The    names  of  the   persons    are 

in  the  Ch.  of  St.  Paul's,  Aug.  25, 1660  these  ;    viz.   Mr.  Richard  Howlett   to 

(Wood,  Ath.  Ox.  ii.  294).]  the  Rectory  of  Lachinden;  Dr.  Gaw- 

{  [Sir  Thomas  Howe  had  been  em-  dine  to  the  Rectory  of  R-erkinge  (sic), 

ployed  successively  as  Ambassador  to  in  Essex  ;  Mr.  Christopher  Newstead 

the  Porte,  to   Poland,   Sweden,   and  to  the  Rectory  of  Stisted. 

Denmark.     He  was  now  M.P.  for  the  "  The  House,  taking  this  petition 

University  of  Oxford.— See  his  life  in  into  consideration,  ordered,  That  this 

Biogr.  Brit.]  House  doth  approve  of  Dr.  Gawdine 

["  April  1, 1642.  to  be  presented  to  the  Rectory  of  Ber- 

"  The  petition  of  the  Archbishop  of  king,  and  that  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury  was  read,  showing  that  Canterbury  do  present  him  accord- 
there  are  some  benefices  now  void,  ingly ;  and  for  the  other  two  persons 
which  are  in  his  bestowing,  but  in  mentioned  in  the  aforesaid  petition, 
obedience  to  their  Lordships'  order  he  this  House  will  take  a  few  days  to 
hath  the  names  of  such  persons  a.s  he  consider  of  it."] 


life  and  learning,  and  attend  with  it  at  the  Parliament,  to 
make  the  best  friends  for  himself.  The  business  stuck  still. 
At  last  he  met  with  the  L.  Kimboltori,  who  presently  made 
all  weather  fair  for  him  ;  and  upon  his  Lp.'s  motion  to  the 
House,  an  order  passed  for  Mr.  Hewlett  to  have  Lach-  Apr.  13, 
ingdon11.  The  motive  this:  Mr.  Hewlett  was  Fellow  of1( 
(88)  Sidney  College  in  Cambridge,  and  tutor  at  that  time  to 
two  sons  of  the  L.  Mountague1,  the  L.  Kimbolton' s  uncle; 
at  which  time  also  the  L.  Kimbolton  himself  was  a  student 
in  the  same  college,  and  knew  the  person  and  worth  of 
Mr.  Howlett.  This  his  Lp.  honourably  now  remembered ; 
else  it  might  have  gone  hard  with  Mr.  Hewlett's  necessities. 
So  upon  the  order  thus  obtained,  I  collated  Lachiiigdon 
upon  him. 

After  this  the  E.  of  Warwick  went  Lord  Admiral  to  sea1, 
by  appointment  of  the  Parliament;  and  forthwith  I  was 
served  with  another  order  to  give  Stisted  to  Mr.  Clark k.  Apr.  20, 
Hereupon  I  petitioned  again,  and  set  forth2  my  relations  and 
engagements  to  Sir  Tho.  Howe  ;  and  Dr.  Gawden  having  told 
me  that  the  E.  of  Warwick  had  left  that  business  for  me  in 
trust  with  the  L.  Roberts1, 1  made  bold  to  write  to  his  lordship, 
and  entreat  his  lawful  favour.  The  L.  Roberts  denied  that  any 
such  order  or  care  of  that  business  was  left  with  him,  nor 
would  he  meddle  in  it ;  but  referred  me  to  the  L.  Kimbolton, 
who  still  followed  the  business  close  for  Mr.  Clark.  By  all 

1  ['  to  sea,'  interlined.]  2  ['  and  set  forth '  in  marg.] 

h  ["  Upon  reading  of  a  petition  of  of  Lachenden,  with  what  convenient 

the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  wherein  speed  he  can."] 

Mr.  Kichard  Howlett,  Bachelor  of  Di-  '  [Edward  Montagu,  created  Baron 
vinity,  (having  lost  lately  a  good  pre-  Montagu  of  Boughton,  June  29,  1621  ; 
ferment  in  Ireland  by  the  rebellion  ancestor  of  the  Dukes  of  Montagu  and 
there,)  was  nominated  by  his  Grace  to  of  the  present  Duke  of  Buccleuch.] 
be  preferred  to  the  Rectory  of  Lachen-  k  ["  Ordered,  That  Mr.  John  Clarke, 
den,  in  the  county  of  Essex,  with  the  the  now  Curate  of  the  Parish  of  Stisted, 
approbation  of  this  House,  and  also  in  the  County  of  Essex,  and  the  mi- 
upon  a  certificate  of  the  Lord  Primate  nister  there  being  lately  dead,  is  here 
of  Armagh,  '  that  the  said  Mr.  How-  by  specially  recommended  to  the  Arch- 
lett  is  a  man  esteemed  of  sound  doc-  bishop  of  Canterbury,  to  be  a  Minister 
trine  and  uncorrupted  life,  and  very  and  Parson  of  the  aforesaid  Church  of 
industrious  in  the  ministry,'  it  is  Stisted,  being  certified  to  be  a  man  of 
ordered,  That  this  House  doth  approve  good  life  and  sound  doctrine."] 
of  the  said  Mr.  Richard  Howlett,  and  J  [John  Robartes,  second  Baron 
do  recommend  him  to  the  said  Arch-  Robartes,  created  Vise.  Boclmin  and 
bishop  of  Canterbury  to  be  collated  Earl  of  Radnor,  July  23,  1679.] 
and  instituted  to  the  aforesaid  Rectory 


which  it  appeared  to  me,  that  the  E.  of  Warwick  had  forgotten 

his  promise  to  me,  to  say  no  more  l. 

Soon  after  I  received  another  order,  to  give  Stisted  to 
Apr.  25,  Mr.  Clark.  To  this  I  answered  again  by  petition,  but  with 
Mali  3,  like  success :  for  another  order  came  forth  peremptorily  to 
1642°.  command  me  to  give  Stisted  to  Mr.  Clark.  But  it  so  fell 

out,  that  this  order  was  not  brought  to  me  till  ten  days  after 

the  date ;  I  sent  my  counsel  to  attend  the  Lds.  that  I  might 

not  fall  into  contempt.    The  business  was  not  then  called  on, 
1642  16'     anc^  ky  tne  sixteenth  of  the  same  month,  Stisted  fell  in  lapse 

to  his  Majesty  ° :   so  I  lost  the  giving  of  the  benefice,  and 

somebody  else  their  ends  upon  me. 

1  ['  to  say  no  more.'  inserted  afterwards,  partly  on  opposite  page.] 

111  [Lords'  Journals,  vol.  v.  p.  16  ]          sented  by  the  King  to  Stisted,  June 
"  [Ibid.  p.  38.]  20,  1642  (llymer,  Foed.  IX.  iii.  104).] 

0  [Christopher  JSTewstead  was  pre- 


196  CAP.  XVI. 

ON  May  1 5,  Sunday,  I  made  a  shift,  between  my  man  and  Mail  i, 
my  staff,  to  go  to  church.  There  preached  one  Mr.  Joslin a.  1( 
His  text,  Judg.  v.  23,  "  Curse  ye  Merosh,"  &c.  To  pass  over 
what  was  strangely  evil  throughout  his  sermon,  his  personal 
abuse  of  me  was  so  foul  and  so  palpable,  that  women  and 
boys  stood  up  in  the  church,  to  see  how  I  could  bear  it :  and 
this  was  my  first  welcome  into  the  church,  after  my  long 
lameness.  But  I  humbly  thank  God  for  it,  I  bare  his  viru 
lence  patiently,  and  so  it  vanished  :  as  did  much  other  of  like 
nature,  which  I  bare  both  before  and  after  this.  God  forgive 

After  this  I  had  some  quietness;  most  particulars  lying 
dead,  out  of  several  respects  unknown  to  me.  But  all  things 
grew  higher  and  higher  between  the  King  and  the  Parliament, 
to  the  great  damage  and  distraction  of  the  kingdom.  God 
of  his  mercy  send  a  speedy  and  a  blessed  issue,  and  preserve 
his  Majesty,  the  kingdom,  and  this  poor  Church  from  ruin: 
but  I  much  fear  our  sins  are  ripe  for  a  very  great,  if  not  a 
final  judgment. 

Friday,  August  the  19th,  Captain  Royden  and  his  company,  Aug.  19, 
by  order  of  Parliament,  came  about  seven  of  the  clock  in  the 
evening  to  my  house  at  Lambeth,  to  take  away  my  arms. 
They  stayed  there  all  night,  and  searched  every  room,  and 
where  any  key  was  not  ready,  brake  open  doors :  and  the 
next  morning  they  carried  my  arms  away  in  carts  to  Guild- 
Hall,  London ;  and  I  was  sufficiently  abused  all  the  way  by 
the  people,  as  my  arms  passed.  They  gave  out  in  London, 
there  were  arms  for  ten  thousand  men ;  whereas  there  was 
not  enough  for  two  hundred.  And  the  arms  I  bought  of  my 
predecessor's  executors ;  only  some  I  was  forced  to  mend,  the 
fashion  of  arms  being  changed.  He  left  to  defend  that  large 
house,  but  six  swords,  six  carabines,  three  halberds,  and  two 

a  Jocelin.    [See  Diary  at  this  date.] 



Sept,  1 

9,  1642. 

10,  1642. 

Octob.  15. 

half  pikes  :  though  the  order  b  formerly  made  by  the  Lords, 
required  necessary  defence  for  the  house  should  be  left.  But 
it  seems  Captain  Hoyden's  order  now  given  was  stricter ;  for 
he  was  towards  me  and  my  house  very  civil  in  all  things. 

This  day,  Sept.  1,  1612,  the  Bps.  were  voted  down  in 
the  House  of  Commons0:  and  that  night  there  was  great 
ringing  and  bonfires  in  the  city ;  which  I  conceive  (89)  was 
cunningly  ordered  to  be  done  by  Alderman  Pennington,  the 
new  L.  Mayor,  chosen  in  the  room  of  Sir  Richard  Gurney, 
who  was  then  in  the  Tower,  and  put  out  of  his  office  by  the 
Parliament.  And  my  mind  gives  me,  that  if  bishops  do  go 
down,  the  city  will  not  have  cause  to  joy  in  it. 

About  this  time  the  cathedral  church  of  Canterbury  was 
grossly  profaned;  yet  far  worse  afterward. 

All- Hallows,  Bread-street,  was  now  fallen  void,  and  in  my 
gift ;  and,  September  9,  there  came  an  order  from  the  House 
of  Peers  for  me  to  give  it d  :  but  having  six  months'  respite  by 
law,  I  delayed  it  for  that  time,  which  created  me  much  trouble 
from  the  parishioners,  who  often  solicited  me  1. 

About  the  tenth  of  this  month,  the  bishops  were  voted  1 97 
down  in  the  Upper  House c.     So  it  seems  I  must  live  to  see 
my  calling  fall  before  me. 

Upon  Saturday,  Octob.  15,  it  was  resolved  upon  the  ques 
tion,  That  all  rents  and  profits  of  all  archbishops,  bishops, 
deans  and  chapters,  and  other  delinquents,  should  be  seques 
tered  for  the  use  and  service  of  the  Commonwealth f:  according 

1  ['  for  me  to  ...  me.'  on  opposite  page.] 

b  P.  82  [of  original  MS.  See  vol.  iii. 
p.  456.] 

c  [It  is  thus  entered  in  the  Com 
mons'  Journals  : — 

"  The  declaration  from  the  General 
Assembly  of  Scotland  was,  according 
to  the  order  of  this  House,  now  again 
read.  And  the  House  fell  into  the 
debate  thereof. 

"  Kesolved  upon  the  question,  lie- 
mine,  contract icente,  That  the  govern 
ment  of  the  Church  of  England  by 
archbishops,  bishops,  their  chancellors 
and  commissaries,  deans,  deans  and 
chapters,  archdeacons,  and  other  eccle 
siastical  officers,  hath  been  found  by 
long  experience  to  be  a  great  impedi 
ment  to  the  perfect  reformation  and 

growth  of  religion,  and  very  prejudi 
cial  to  the  state  and  government  of 
this  kingdom.  And  this  House  doth 
resolve  that  the  same  shall  be  taken 

d  ["  Ordered,  That  Mr.  Seaman  shall 
be  recommended  to  the  Archbishop 
of  Cant,  to  be  rector  of  the  parish  of 
All-Hallows,  Bread-street,  in  London, 
in  the  place  of  Mr.  Lauson,  who  is 
lately  dead."] 

e  [See  the  Answer  to  the  Declaration 
of  the  General  Assembly  of  Scotland, 
about  Church  Government,  Lords' 
Journals,  vol.  v.  pp.  349,  350.] 

f  [See  Lords'  Journals,  vol.  v.  p. 


to  which  ordinance,  all  the  profits  of  my  archbishopric  were 
taken  away  from  me,  and  not  one  penny  allowed  me  for 
maintenance.  Nay,  whereas  this  order  was  not  made  till  a 
full  fortnight  after  Michaelmas ;  yet  so  hard  a  hand  was 
carried  over  me,  as  that  my  rents,  due  at  Michaelmas,  were 
seized  on  to  the  use  of  the  Parliament  :  by  which  means  my 
estate  was  as  good  as  sequestered  almost  from  our  Lady-day 
before ;  more  than  two  parts  of  three  of  the  rents  being 
payable  at  Michaelmas  s. 

An  order  came  from  the  House,  October  24 h,  that  no  Octob.  24. 
prisoner  should  keep  above  two  servants,  nor  speak  with  any 
man,  but  in  the  presence  and  hearing  of  his  warder.  My 
case  for  the  former  branch  of  this  order,  differed  from  all 
other  prisoners.  For  they  lay  in  several  warders'  houses,  in 
which  they  might  be  fitted  by  the  servants  of  the  house  for 
ordering  their  diet ;  but  I  was  in  a  prison-lodging,  void  of  all 
comfort  and  company.  And  therefore  upon  Octob.  27,  °ct°t>-  27. 
(which  was  the  very  next  day  after  the  order  was  showed  to 
me,)  I  humbly  besought  the  Lords  for  a  cook  and  butler, 
beside  the  two  which  were  to  attend  me  in  my  prison  *, 
by  reason  of  my  age  and  infirmities;  which,  though  with 
difficulty,  yet  I  humbly  thank  their  Lps.  was  granted  me, 
Octob.  28  k.  Octob.  28. 

On  Wednesday,  Nov.  2,  I  dreamed  (that  night)  that l  the  Nov.  2. 
Church  was  undone,  and  that  I  went  to  St.  John's  in  Oxford, 
where  I  found  the  roof  off  from  some  part  of  the  college,  and 
the  walls  ready  to  fall  down.     God  be  merciful. 

Upon  Wednesday,  Nov.  9,  about  five  of  the  clock  in  the  Noveml>.9. 
morning,  Captain  Brown  and  his  company  entered  my  house 
at  Lambeth,  to  keep  it  for  public  service.  Hereupon  I  peti 
tioned  the  Lords  the  same  day,  for  the  safety  of  the  library, 
of  my  own  study,  and  of  such  goods  as  were  in  my  house : 
all  which  was  very  honourably  granted  unto  me  by  a  full 
order  of  the  Lords  that  very  day ;  with  a  strict  charge,  that 
they  which  were  there  employed  in  the  public  service,  should 

1  [' night)  that '  interlined.] 

*  It  was  so  then,  though  now  other-  '  f.  person 

wise.  k  [There  is  no   notice   of  this   in 

h  [See   Lords'   Journals,   vol.  v.   p.  Lords'  Journals.] 




Nov.  16. 

Nov.  22. 




take  special  care  that  all  the  forenamed  things  should  be 
preserved  in  safety. 

Either  this  day,  or  the  day  before,  Mr.  Holland  and  Mr. 
Ashurst,  two  of  the  House  of  Commons,  came,  accompanied 
with  some  musketeers,  and  entered  my  house,  and  searched 
for  money,  and  took  away  seventy  and  eight  pound  from  my 
receiver,  Mr.  Walter  Dobson,  and  said  it  was  for  the  mainte 
nance  of  the  King's  children1.  God  of  his  mercy  look  favour 
ably  upon  the  King,  and  bless  his  children  from  needing  any 
such  poor  maintenance. 

November  16,  Wednesday,  an  order  forbidding  the  pri 
soners'  men  to  speak  one  with  another,  but  in  the  presence 
of  the  warder,  and  to  bar  them  the  liberty  of  the  Tower  :  only 
this  order  was  so  far  enlarged,  Novemb.  22,  that  any  of 
them  might  go  out  of  the  Tower  to  buy  provision  or  other 

On  the  24th  of  this  month,  the  soldiers  at  Lambeth-House  198 
brake  open  the  chapel  doors,   and  offered  violence  to  the 
organ ;  but  before  much  hurt  was  done,  the  captain  heard  of 
it,  and  stayed  them. 

Upon  the  death  of  Sir  Charles  Caesar  ra,  the  Mastership  of 
the  Faculties  fell  into  my  gift ;  but  I  could  not  dispose  of  it, 
by  reason  of  (90) the  order  of  Parliament,  of  Octob.  23, 16411, 
but  with  their  approbation.  Therefore  I  petitioned  the  Lords 
that  I  might  give  it  to  Dr.  Ayletn  or  Dr.  Heath0,  both 
then  attendants  in  that  honourable  House;  well  knowing 
it  would  be  in  vain  to  name  any  other :  and  the  Lords 

1  ['of .  ..  1641'  interlined.] 

1  [The  orders  of  the  House  of  Com 
mons  on  this  subject  ran  thus  : — 
"  Nov.  8,  1642. 

"Mr.  Ashurst,  Mr.  Holland,  are 
appointed  to  go  to  Lambeth  House, 
and  to  take  some  of  the  Trained  Bauds 
with  them  ;  and  to  seize  the  rents  that 
are  now  paying  in  to  his  receiver,  and 
other  officers,  and  to  search  the  house 
for  arms,  and  to  search  the  steward's 
and  receiver's  books,  to  see  what  mo 
nies  have  been  received  of  the  Mi 
chaelmas  rents." 

"  Nov.  9,  1642.  Ordered,  That  Mr. 
Dobson,  the  Bishop  of  Canterbury's 
receiver,  do  pay  unto  Mr.  Holland  the 

monies  already  received  by  him,  or  to 
be  received,  of  the  said  Bishop's  rents 
and  revenues ;  and  that  the  said  mo 
nies  shall  be  employed  for  the  use  of 
the  King's  two  youngest  children's 
household.  And  that  Mr.  Holland  be 
accountable  for  the  said  monies,  in 
such  manner  as  the  House  shall  di 

m  [The  youngest  son  of  Sir  Julius 
Csesar.  (Wood,  F.  0.  i.  348.)] 

n  [Rob.  Aylet,  M.A.  of  Cambridge, 
incorporated  at  Oxford,  July  12, 1608, 
afterwards  D.C.L.  (Wood,F.O.  i.328.)] 

0  [See  vol.  iii.  p.  248.] 


sent  me  an  order  to  give  it  to  Dr.  Aylet  P  ;  and  I  did  it 1  Decemb.  8. 

The  vicarage  of  Horsham  in  Sussex  was  in  my  gift,  and  fell  Decemb. 
void.  At  the  entreaty  of  Sir  John  Conniers,  then  Lieutenant 19t 
of  the  Tower,  I  petitioned  the  House  that  I  might  give  it  to 
Mr.  Conniers,  the  lecturer  at 2  Bow.  But  before  my  petition 
came  to  be  delivered,  the  House  had  made  an  order  against 
him,  upon  complaint  from  Horsham  of  his  disordered  lifeq; 
so  busy  were  that  party  of  men 3  to  complain  of  all  men,  who 
were  not  theirs  in  faction ;  and  such  ready  admittance  had 
both  they  and  their  complaints  in  both  Houses.  For  my 
part,  the  man  was  a  stranger  to  me,  and  inquiring  after  him 
(as  well  as  a  poor  prisoner  could),  I  heard  no  ill  of  him  for  his 
life.  Nevertheless,  hearing  how  the  Lords  were  possessed 
against  him,  I  forbare  the  sending  of  that  petition,  and  sent 
another  for  my  own  chaplain,  Mr.  William  Brackstone.  But 
he  was  refused1';  yet  no  exception  taken  against  him,  for  life 
or  learning ;  nor  indeed  could  any  be  s. 

Upon  the  23d  of  the  same  month 4,  Dr.  Layton  came  with  Decemb. 


1  ['and  I  did  it'  originally  written  '  which  I  did  ']        2  ['  at'  orig.  <  of] 

3  ['so  ...  men'  originally  written  'as  they  were  so  busy.'] 

4  [A  word  here  erased;  it  seems  to  be  'Thursday.'] 

P  ["  Dec.  8,  1642.  Archbishop  of  Cant.,  who  is  a  disserv- 

"  The  petition  of  the  Archbishop  of  ing  man,  and   unfit  for  that  place; 

Cant,  was  read  showing, '  That  whereas  Hereupon  it  is    ordered,   That    the 

Sir  Charles  Csesar,  Master  of  the  Rolls,  Archbishop  of  Cant,  shall  have  notice 

and  Master  of  the  Faculties,  is  dead,  that  this  House  doth  not  approve  of 

and  by  that  means  renders  the  office  the  said  Coniers  to  be  presented  to 

of  the  Faculties  void,  which  is  in  his  the  said  parish."] 
Lordship's  gift;   and  whereas  by  an          r  ["Dec.  26,  1642.     Upon  reading 

order  of  this  House,  dated  23d  of  Oc-  of  a  petition   of  the   Archbishop   of 

tober,  164  l,he  is  required  not  to  bestow  Cant,  showing,   '  That  whereas,  by  an 

any  office   or   dignity   without    first  order  of  this  House,  dated  October  27, 

acquainting  their  Lordships  with  it,  1641,  he  is  required  to  give  no  bene- 

for  your  Lordships'  approbation  of  the  fice  or  dignity  without  first  acquaint- 

person  :  ing  this  House,  for  their  Lordships' 

"  '  He  humbly  names  Dr.  Heath  and  approbation  of  the  person,  and  whereas 

Dr.  Aylett,  men  able  and  honest,  and  the  vicarage  of  Horsham,  in  Sussex, 

such  as  have  given  long  attendance  is  in  his  patronage  and  now  void,  his 

upon  this  House,  and  if  their  Lord-  Grace  names  to  the  said  vicarage  Mr. 

ships  approve  either  of  them,  he  shall  Win.  Blackston  (sic),  CJerk,  and  his 

give  the  office  accordingly.'  chaplain  in  house  at  the  time  of  the 

"  Ordered,  That  this  House  approves  breaking  up  thereof,  and  hopes  he  will 

of  Dr.  Aylett,  and  recommends  him  to  deserve  their  Lordships'  approbation  : ' 
the  Archbishop  of  Cant,  to  be  Judge          "  Ordered,    That  this   House   will 

of  the  Faculties."]  consider  further  of  this  person  now 

i  ["  Upon  petition  of  the  inhabit-  nominated."] 

tants  of  the  borough  and  parish  of         s  [For  the  persons  mentioned   in 

Horsham,  in   the  county  of  Sussex,  this  paragraph,  see  notes  on  Diary  at 

showing  that  one  Mr.  Coniers    hath  the  above  date.] 
been  presented  to  that  parish  by  the 


a  warrant  from  the  honourable  House  of  Commons,  for  the 
keys  of  my  house  at  Lambeth  to  be  delivered  to  him,  that 
prisoners  might  be  brought  thither*.  I  referred  myself  to 
God,  that  nothing  might  trouble  me  :  but  then  I  saw  it 
evident,  that  all  that  could,  should  be  done  to  break  my 
patience.  Had  it  not  been  so,  somebody  else  might  have 
been  sent  to  Lambeth,  and  not  Layton,  who  had  been  cen 
sured  in  the  Star-Chamber  to  lose  his  ears,  for  a  base  and  a 
most  virulent  libel  against  bishops  and  the  Church-govern 
ment  established  by  law :  in  which  book  of  his  [were  many 
things  !]  which  in  some  times  might  have  cost  him  dearer. 

The  same  day  it  was  ordered  by  the  honourable  House  of 
Commons,  that  Mr.  Glyn,  Mr.  Whitlock,  Mr.  Hill,  or  any 
two  of  them,  should  take  care  for  the  securing  of  the  public 
library  belonging  to  the  See  of  Canterbury,  the  books,  writ 
ings,  evidences,  and  goods  in  Lambeth-House,  and  to  take  the 
keys  into  their  custody  u  :  and  a  reference  to  the  Committee, 
to  prepare  an  ordinance  for  the  regulating  of  Lambeth-House 
for  a  prison,  in  the  manner  as  Winchester- House  is  regulated  x. 

Jan.  5.  And  upon  Janua.  5,  a  final  order  from  both  Houses  came  for 
the  settling  of  Lambeth  prison:  in  which  order  it  was  in 
cluded,  that  all  my  wood  and  coal  then  in  the  house  should 
remain  there  for  the  use  of  the  soldiers.  And  when  motion 
was  made,  that  I  might  have  some  to  the  Tower  for  my  own 
necessary  use,  it  would  not  be  hearkened  to.  There  was  then 
in  the  house  above  two  hundred  pounds  worth  of  wood  and 
coal  which  was  mine. 

Janua.  6.         The  next  day  I  received  a  letter  from  the  E.  of  Manchester,  199 

1  [These  words  were  inserted  by  II.  Wharton  to  complete  the  sense.  Arch 
bishop  Bancroft  proposed  to  read,  '  which  book  of  his  in  some  times/  or,  '  in 
which  book  were  many  bold  passages,  which,'  &c.] 

*  [It  had  been  ordered  by  the  House  the  keys  of  the  libraries  and  other 
of  Commons,  Dec.  19, 1642,  "  That  the  rooms,  where  the  books,  writings,  evi- 
prisoners  committed  to  Crosby  House  dences,  and  other  goods  are,  into  their 
and  Gresham  College  shall  be  removed  custody :  and  it  is  referred  to  the  Corn- 
to  Lambeth-House,  there  to  be  kept  mittee  that  is  appointed  to  consider 
in  safe  custody,  and  that  Dr.  Laiton  of  fit  places  for  prisons  to  prepare  an 
shall  be  keeper  of  that  place."]  ordinance  for  the  regulating  of  Lam- 

u  ["Ordered,   That  Mr.  Glyn,  Mr.  beth-House,  in*  like  manner  as  Win- 

Whitlock,  and  Mr.  Hill  do  take  care  chester-House  is  regulated."] 
for  the  securing  of  the  public  library         *  [It  was  voted  by  the  House,  Nov. 

belonging  to  the  See  of  Canterbury,  ll,1642,thatWinchester-Houseshould 

the  books,   writings,  evidences,   and  be  made  a  prison ;  and  the  House  of 

goods  in  Lambeth-House,  and  to  take  Lords  agreed  to  that  vote,  Nov.  14.] 


commanding  me,  in  the  name  of  the  House,  to  give  All- 
Hallows,  Bread-street,  to  Mr.  Seaman  y.  This  I  was  no  way 
moved  at ;  because  I  had  before  expressed  myself  to  my  L. 
of  Northumberland,  that  I  would  give  this  benefice,  out  of 
my  respects  to  his  Lp.,  to  Mr.  Seaman  his  chaplain.  Yet  I 
cannot  but  observe,  that  though  this  was  made  known  to  the 
E.  of  Manchester,  yet  he  would  not  forbear  his  letter,  that 
the  benefice  might  be  given  by  order,  and  not  seem  to  come 
from  any  courtesy  of  mine  to  that  honourable  person. 

T  [See  vol.  iii.  p.  248.] 


CAP.  XVII.  200 

Januar.26.  ON  Thursday,  Janua.  26,  the  Bill  passed  in  the  Lords' 
House  for  abolishing  of  Episcopacy  a.  God  be  merciful  to 
this  sinking  Church. 

Feb.,  3,  jjy  this  time  the  rectory  of  Chartham  in  Kent  was  fallen 

void,  by  the  death  of  the  Dean  of  Canterbury  b,  and  in  my  gift. 
It  was  a  very  good  benefice,  and  I  saw  it  would  create  me 
much  trouble  in  the  collating  of  it.  The  first  onset  upon  me 
for  it  was  by  Dr.  Heath;  and  it  was  to  give  it  to  Mr.  Edward 
Corbet  of  Mcrton  College,  of  which  house  Dr.  Heath  had 
formerly  been.  Very  earnest  he  was  with  me,  and  told  me 
the  L.  General c  was  earnest  for  him,  and  that  it  would  be 
carried  from  me,  if  I  did  it  not  willingly ;  which  I  were  better 
do  l.  My  answer  was,  I  could  not  help  that :  but  Mr.  Corbet 

Feb.  14.  had  many  ways  disserved  me  in  Oxford,  and  that  certainly 
I  would  never  give  it  him.  So  we  parted :  and  though  I 
could  not  be  jealous  of  Dr.  Heath,  yet  neither  could  I  take  2 
it  well.  And  on  Tuesday,  Feb.  14,  I  received  a  letter  from 
his  Majesty,  bearing  date  January  17,  (91)  in  which  letters 
the  King  commands  me  to  give  Chartham  to  one  Mr.  Red- 
dinge,  a  man  of  good  note  in  the  Church ;  or  if  I  were  other 
wise  commanded  by  Parliament  not  to  give,  then  to  lapse  it 
to  him,  that  he  might  give  it.  I  returned  a  present  answer 
by  word  of  mouth,  and  by  the  same  messenger,  that  I  would 
either  give,  or  lapse  the  benefice,  as  his  Majesty's  gracious 
letters  required  of  me  3  d. 

I  was  now  in  a  fine  case  between  the  King  and  the  Parlia 
ment  :  one  I  was  sure  to  offend.  Yet  these  letters  of  the 
King's  came  happily  in  one  respect :  for  that  very  afternoon, 

'if  I  did  ...  better  do.'  on  opposite  page.] 

'  yet .  .  .  take '  originally  written  '  yet  1  could  not  take '] 

*  I  returned  ...  of  me.'  inserted  afterwards,  part  on  opposite  page.] 

•  [See    Lords'  Journals,   vol.  v.  p.          d  [See  the   King's   letter,    vol.  iii. 

572.]  p.  249 ;    on  which,  and  the  previous 

b  [Isaac  Bargrave.]  page,  will  be  found  other  notes  illus- 

c  [Rob.    Devereux,    third   Earl  of     trative  of  this  passage.] 



the  E.  of  Warwick  came  to  me  to  the  Tower,  and  after  a  few 
fair  words  bestowed  on  me,  drew  out  an  order  of  Parliament, 
to  give  Chartham  to  one  Mr.  Culmer e,  who  his  Lp.  said  was 
a  very  worthy  man ;  and  perhaps  I  might  have  believed  his 
Lp.,  had  I  not  known  the  contrary  :  but  I  well  knew  him  to 
be  ignorant,  and  with  his  ignorance,  one  of  the  most  daring 
schismatics  in  all  that  country.  This  order  of  Parliament 
bare  date  Feb.  4f,  but  was  not  showed  me  till  then.  My 
answer  to  my  Lord  was,  that  I  had  received  a  letter  from  his 
Majesty,  which  required  me  to  give  that  benefice  to  another 
man,  or  else  lapse  it  to  him ;  and  therefore  humbly  desired 
his  Lordship  to  do  me  good  offices  in  the  honourable  House, 
considering  in  what  difficulties  I  was,  and  how  many  great 
livings  I  had  given  by  orders  of  Parliament,  and  none  at  the 
King's  command  till  now.  So  we  parted. 

After  this,  Mr.  Culmer  came  to  me  about  the  benefice,  and 
protested  his  conformity  to  the  Church.  I  think  the  man 
forgot  that  I  knew  both  him  and  his  ways.  I  told  him  I  had 
given  my  Lord  of  Warwick  my  answer.  But  Mr.  Culmer 
rested  not  so :  but  got  a  servant  of  mine  down  the  stairs  to 
him,  and  there  was  very  earnest  with  him  to  know,  whether 
201  it  were  not  possible  to  work  me  to  give  him  Chartharn. 
And  then  out  of  the  abundance  of  his  honesty  and  worthiness, 
offered  my  servant  a  hundred  and  fifty  pound  to  procure  him 
the  benefice  :  and  added,  that  he  should  have  no  cause  to 
distrust  him,  for  he  should  have  the  money  presently  paid 
him.  This  is  as  worthy  a  piece  of  simony  as  need  to  be  :  and 
but  that  the  E.  of  Warwick  is  a  man  of  honour,  and  unfit  to 
stoop  to  such  base  courses,  it  is  enough  to  make  a  man  think 
Mr.  Culmer  would  have  been  very  thankful  to  his  Lp.  for  so 
much  pains,  as  to  come  to  the  Tower  and  solicit  for  him. 

The  Earl  of  Warwick,  at  his  next  opportunity  in  the  House, 
told  the  Lords,  that  whereas  they  had  made  an  order,  that 

e  [Richard  Culmer  had  been  ejected  formed,  '  That  the  benefice  of  Chart- 
from  Croodneston  in  Kent,  for  not  ham,  near  Canterbury,  is  now  actually 
reading  the  Book  of  Sports,  which  void,  being  in  the  gift  of  the  Arch- 
made  him  a  bitter  enemy  to  Laud.  bishop  of  Cant.,'  it  is  ordered,  That  Mr. 
He  was  thrust  into  the  living  of  Min-  Richard  Culmer,  a  painful  minister, 
ster,  on  the  ejection  of  Meric  Casau-  who  was  deprived  of  his  living  for  not 
bon.  He  is  notorious  for  having  grossly  reading  the  Book  for  Sabbath  Sports, 
profaned  Canterbury  Cathedral.  See  shall  be  recommended  to  the  Arch- 
more  in  Wood,  F.  0.  i.  447  ]  bishop  of  Canterbury  to  be  minister 

'   ["  Feb.  4,  1G42.  of  Chartham  aforesaid."] 

"  The    House   being   this   day  in- 

LAUD. — VOL.  iv.  c 


the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  should  give  Chartham  to  Mr. 
Culmer,  a  very  worthy  preacher ] ;  he  had  been  with  me 
himself  about  it,  and  that  I  had  pretended  letters  from  the 
King,  and  refused  to  obey  their  order.  This  was  like  to  have 
stirred  great  heat  against  me,  but  that  a  lord  stood  up  and 
doubted  of  the  order:  putting  them  in  mind,  that  the  Ld. 
General  was  engaged  for  this  benefice  for  Mr.  Corbet,  and 
had  left  the  care  of  it  upon  himself  and  some  other  lords  in 
his  absence.  Hereupon  there  was  inquiry  made,  when,  and 
how,  that  order  passed2  for  Culmer,  and  it  was  found  to  be 
slipped  out  at  a  very  empty  house.  So  the  E.  of  Warwick 
excused  the  matter,  that  he  knew  not  of  the  3  Ld.  General's 
purpose ;  and  so  the  business  slept,  and  never  awaked  more 
for  Culmer. 

The  Lord  Brook  was  now  in  action.  A  bitter  enemy  he 
was  to  the  Church,  and  her  government  by  bishops.  On 
Mar.  2,  March  2,  he  was  going  to  give  onset  upon  the  Close  of  the 
cathedral  at  Lichfield  :  and  as  he  was  taking  view  of  the 
place,  from  a  window  in  a  house  opposite  to  the  Close,  and 
his  beaver  up,  so  that  a  musket  at  such  a  distance  could  have 
done  him  but  little  harm ;  yet  was  he  shot  in  the  left  eye, 
and  killed  dead  in  the  place  without  speaking  one  words. 
Whence  I  shall  observe  three  things : — First,  that  this  great 
and  known  enemy  to  cathedral  churches  died  thus  fearfully 
in  the  assault  of  a  cathedral.  A  fearful  manner  of  death  in 
such  a  quarrel !  Secondly,  that  this  happened  upon  Saint 
Chad's  4  day,  of  which  saint  that  cathedral  bears  the  name. 
Thirdly,  that  this  lord  coming  from  dinner  about  two  years 
since 5,  from  the  Lord  Herbert's  house  in  Lambeth,  upon 
some  discourse  of  St.  Paul's  Church,  then  in  their  eye  upon 
the  water,  said  to  some  young  lords  that  were  with  him,  ( that 
he  hoped  to  live  to  see  that  one  stone  of  that  building  should 
not  be  left  upon  another.'  But  that  church  stands  yet,  and 
that  eye  is  put  out  that  hoped  to  see  the  ruins  of  it.  Many 
heavy  accidents  have  already  fallen  out  in  these  unnatural 

'preacher;'  originally  written  *  divine ;']          2  ['passed' interlined.] 
' the '  orig.  '  my  ']  4  ['  Chad's'  originally  written  ' Cedd's '] 

'  about .  .  .  since,'  in  margin.] 

[See  notes  on  corresponding  passage  in  Diary.] 


wars ;  and  God  alone  knows,  how  many  more  shall,  before 
they  '  end :  but  I  intend  no  history  but  of  my  own  sad  mis 
fortunes  ;  nor  would  I  have  mentioned  this,  but  that  it  relates 
to  the  Church,  which,  for  my  calling's  sake,  I  take  as  a  part, 
and  a  near  one,  of  myself. 

(92)  On  Friday,  Mar.  24,  one  Mr.  Ford  came  to  me  to  the  Mar.  24, 

1  f\A  ^ 

Tower,  and  told  me,  there  was  a  plot  to  send  me,  and  my 
L.  of  Ely,  Bishop  Wren,  as  delinquents,  to  New  England, 
within  fourteen  days :  and  that  Mr.  Wells,  a  minister  that 
202  came  thence,  offered  wagers  of  it.  The  meeting  where  he 
heard  this,  was  (he  said)  at  Mr.  Bankes',  a  mercer's  house  in 
Friday-street,  a  son-in-law  of  Mr.  Foord's.  This  gentleman 
told  me  he  was  a  Suffolk  man ;  but  I  never  saw  him  before, 
and  was  doubtful  of  the  truth  of  his  relation  :  partly,  because 
I  knew  no  motive  he  had  to  take  such  care  of  me,  being  a 
stranger  to  him ;  and  partly,  because  it  could  not  sink  into 
me,  that  the  honourable  Houses,  after  so  long  imprisonment, 
would  send  me  into  such  a  banishment,  without  hearing  me 
or  my  cause.  Yet  he  protested  the  truth  of  it  very  deeply, 
and  wished  me  to  endeavour  to  prevent  it.  That  I  knew  not 
how  to  do ;  for 2  to  petition  against  it  upon  such  a  private 
information,  might  rather  call  it  on,  than  keep  it  off,  seeing 
what  an  edge  there  was  against  me.  Therefore  I  referred 
myself  to  God,  my  constant  anchor,  and  so  rested  my 
thoughts  as  well  as  I  could. 

It  was  now  known  in  the  House  to  the  3  Ld.  General's 
friends,  that  I  had  a  resolution  not  to  give  Chartham  to 
Mr.  Corbet :  and  it  may  be  it  was  thought  also,  that  I  did 
but  pretend  the  King's  letters  about  it ;  and  that  if  some 
other  man  were  named,  against  whom  I  had  no  exception,  it 
might4  be  that  I  would  give  it:  and  if  I  did  give  it,  then 
they  should  discover,  that  either  I  had  110  letters  from  the 
King ;  or  that  I  could  make  bold  to  dispense  with  them,  so 
Mr.  Corbet  were  not  the  man.  And  if  they  could  have 
gained  this  upon  me,  that  notwithstanding  his  Majesty's 
letters,  I  would  have  given  that  benefice  to  another  man,  they 
would  then  have  recalled  their  order h  from  him,  and  com- 

1  ['they'  orig.  'it']  2  ['for'  orig.  'and'] 

3  ['  the '  orig. '  my']  4  ['  might '  orig.  '  may  ' J 

b  For  Culmer. 

c  2 


manflcd  me  for  Mr.  Corbet.  That  this  my  conjecture  hath 
truth  in  it,  seems  evident  to  me  by  all  the  future  carnage  of 
this  business. 

For  one  Mr.  Hudson  came  and  preached  at  the  Tower,  and 

Mar.  28,  gave  &U  men  very  good  content :  and  on  Tuesday,  Mar.  28, 
he  brought  me  an  order  from  the  Lords,  requiring  me  to  give 
Chartham  to  him.  And  this  order  was  known  in  the  Tower ; 
for  some  prisoners  of  note  said,  I  might  do  well  to  give  it 
.  him,  being  so  good  a  preacher.  My  answer  to  him  was  fair ; 
yet  I  told  him  truly,  that  the  King  had  written  to  me  for 
another :  that  I  had  promised  to  give  it,  or  lapse  it,  as  his 
Majesty  required  me :  that  the  King  never  asked  any  of 
me  till  now :  that  I  hoped  the  Parliament  would  not  take  it 
ill,  that  I  gave  this  one  at  the  King's  requisition,  since  I  had 
already  given  as  many  benefices  upon  their  orders  as  came 
to  above  eight  hundred  pounds  a  year,  passing  by  my  own 
friends  and  chaplains,  honest  and  able  men  :  and  for  his 
particular,  I  might  live  to  pleasure  him  with  another,  so  I 
were  not  over-pressed  concerning  this. 

Hudson  either  mistook  my1  answer,  or  wilfully  misreported 
it  and  me  to  the  House ;  and  thereupon  came  another  order 

Apri.  11.  to  me  of  April  11,  to  give  him  Chartham.  I  was  not  willing 
to  be  mistaken  again,  and  therefore  desired  Mr.  Lieutenant 

Apri.  13.  to  deliver  me  a  petition  to  the  House  on  Thursday,  Apri.  13, 
in  which  I  set  forth  my  true  answer,  as  is  above  expressed, 
and  in  all  humility  desired  their  favour.  That  very  day 
another  quick  order  was  made  for  Hudson,  and  brought  to 

Apri.  14.  me  the  next  day,  April  14.  I  petitioned  the  House  again, 
the  same  day,  with  all  submission ;  yet  professed,  that  I  could 
not  disobey  the  King  in  so  fair  a  command.  203 

When  all  this  would  not  serve,  the  mask  was  pulled  off, 

Apri.  21.  and  a  peremptory  order2,  bearing  date  April  21,  was  brought 
to  me  on  Saturday,  Apri.  22,  to  collate  Chartham  upon  Mr. 

Apri.  24.  Ed.  Corbet1.  And  upon  Monday,  April  24,  I  humbly  gave 
my  answer,  as  before;  but  in  the  softest  terms  I  could  express 
it,  and  in  a  petition  J. 

1  ['my'  orig.  'the']         2  ['order,'  orig.  'order  was  brought  to  me,'] 

[Not  in  Lords'  Journals.]  Archbishop  of  Cant. '  desiring,  he  being 

["  Monday.  April  24.  engaged  both  in  duty  and  promise  to 

"  Upon  reading  the  petition  of  the      his  Majesty,  for  the  presenting  a  minis- 


Monday,   Mali  1,  the  windows  of  my  chapel  at  Lambeth  Mail  i. 
were  defaced,  and  the  steps  to  the  communion-table  torn  up. 
And  on  Tuesday,  Maii  2,  the  cross  in  Cheapside  was  taken  Mail  2. 
down,  to  cleanse  that  great  street  of  superstition.     The  same 
day,  in   prosecution  of  the   former  plot,  March  24,  it  was 
moved  in  the  House  of  Commons  to  send  me  to  New  England  • 
but  it  was  rejected.     The  plot  (93)  was  laid  by  Peters,  Wells, 
and  others  of  that  crew,  that  so  they  might  insult  over  me. 

Then  followed  an  exemplary  piece  of  justice,  and  another  Mail  9 
of  mercy.  Of  justice  :  for  my  goods  in  Lambeth-House,  and 
my  books,  were  seized  upon,  and  my  goods  set  to  sale  by 
Captain  Guest,  Dickins,  and  Layton.  And  my  goods1  were 
sold,  and  scarce  at  a  third  part  of  their  worth,  all  save  what 
Layton  took  to  himself,  who  usually  said  all  was  his,  house, 
land,  goods,  and  all.  This  was  on  Tuesday,  Maii  9.  And 
all  this  before  any  proceedings  had  against  me2.  And  of 
mercy  :  for  the  same  day  there  came  out  an  order  for  my 
further  restraint,  that  I  might  not  go  out  of  my  lodging 
without  my  keeper,  so  much  as  to  take  air. 

Much  about  this  time  I  received  another  letter  from  his 
Majesty,  in  which  he  requires  me  (as  he  had  formerly  done, 
for  Chartham  in  particular),  that  as  oft  as  any  benefice  or 
other  spiritual  promotion  whatever  should  fall  void  in  my 
gift,  I  should  dispose  it  only  to  such  as  his  Majesty  should 
name  unto  me ;  or  if  any  command  lay  otherwise  upon  me 
from  either  or  both  Houses  of  Parliament,  I  should  then  let 
them  fall  into  lapse,  that  he  might  dispose  of  them  to  men 
of  worth 3. 

Upon  Tuesday,  Maii  16,  there  came  out  an  ordinance  of  Mali  16. ) 
both  Houses4,  (for  now  the  order  was  grown  up  into  an  Mau  17<  ' 
ordinance,)  requiring  me  to  give  no  benefice,  or  spiritual 

1  ['my  goods'  in  marg. ;  orig.  '  they '] 

2  ['  And  all  ...  against  me.'  in  marg.] 

3  ['Much  about .  .  .  worth.'     This  paragraph  is  in  the  orig.  MS.  inserted  in 
the  blank  page  opposite  to  p.  91.] 

4  ['  requiring  ine'  orig.  written  here.] 

ter  to  the  rectory  of  Chartham  in  the  with  the  House  of  Commons  to-mor- 
county  of  Kent,  that  his  duty  to  his  row  about  expediting  the  trial  of  the 
Majesty  may  be  an  acceptable  answer  said  Archbishop  of  Cant.,  and  to  con- 
to  their  Lordships,  and  that  he  may  sider  how  the  jurisdiction  and  dispos- 
be  no  more  pressed  in  this  particular.'  ing  of  livings  may  be  sequestered  out 
"  Ordered,  To  have  a  conference  of  his  power  and  disposing."] 


Mali  20. 

Mail  26. 

Mail  23. 

promotion  now  void,  or  to  be  void  at  any  time  before  my 
trial,  '  but  with  leave  and  order  of  both  Houses  of  Parlia 
ment  V  This  ordinance  was  delivered  unto  me  the  next  day ; 
and  upon  the  reading  of  it  I  foresaw  a  cloud  rising  over  me 
about  this  business  of  Chartham,  for  which  I  did  assure 
myself  the  ordinance  was  made;  and  soon1  after  came 
another  ordinance  2 1,  requiring  me  by  virtue  of  the  said 
ordinance  to  give  Chartham  to  Mr.  Corbet.  This  order  was 
not  brought  to  me  till  Friday,  May  26.  Then  it  was  brought 
unto  me  by  Mr.  Corbet  himself,  and  Sir  John  Corbet,  a 
Parliament  man,  came  with  him.  Now  upon  the  Tuesday 
before  I  had  sent  an  humble  petition"1  to  the  Lords  for  main- 

['  soon '  orig.  '  presently '] 

2  ['  ordinance/  orig.  '  order/] 

k  The  ordinance  may  be  found  at 
large  in  Rush  w.  par.  iii.  vol.  ii.  p.  320. 
["  Whereas  William  Laud,Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  standeth  impeached  in 
this  present  Parliament  for  high  trea 
son,  and  for  divers  other  great  offences 
and  misdemeanours ;  and  by  reason 
of  many  great  and  weighty  businesses 
he  cannot  yet  be  brought  to  trial  for 
the  said  offences  and  misdemeanours ; 
and  he,  in  respect  of  his  said  Arch 
bishopric  of  Canterbury,  hath  power 
to  give  and  collate  fit  Clerks  to  divers 
Parsonages,  Vicarages,  Prebends,  and 
other  ecclesiastical  promotions  and 
preferments :  and  if  any  of  them  should 
become  void,  and  he  left  to  prefer 
whom  he  please  to  the  same,  the  same 
may  prove  very  inconvenient,  he  be 
stowing  them  upon  unfit  and  unworthy 
persons ;  Be  it  therefore  ordered  and  or 
dained  by  the  Lords  and  Commons  in 
this  present  Parliament,  That  in  case 
any  of  the  aforesaid  Parsonages,  Vicar 
ages,  Prebends,  or  other  ecclesiastical 
promotions  or  preferments,  now  be,  or 
shall  hereafter,  and  before  the  trial  of 
the  said  Lord  Archbishop,  become  void, 
that  the  said  Lord  Archbishop  of  Can 
terbury  shall  forbear  to  present  or  col 
late  any  person  or  persons  thereunto 
without  the  leave  and  order  of  both 
Houses  of  Parliament.  And  it  is 
further  ordered  and  ordained,  That  the 
said  Lord  Archbishop  shall  from  time 
to  time,  until  his  said  trial,  present 
and  collate  such  fit  person  or  persons 
to  every  such  Parsonage,  Vicarage, 
Prebend,  and  other  ecclesiastical  pre 
ferment,  as  aforesaid,  which  now  are, 
or  hereafter  before  his  said  trial  shall 

become  void,  as  by  both  Houses  of 
Parliament  shall  be  nominated  and 
appointed.  And  it  is  further  ordered 
by  the  said  Lords  and  Commons  in 
Parliament,  That  all  Archdeacons, 
Kegisters,  and  other  officers,  ministers, 
and  persons  whatsoever,  shall  forbear 
to  give  or  make  any  admission,  insti 
tution,  collation,  or  induction  of  any 
person  or  persons  whatsoever,  which 
by  the  said  Archbishop  shall  be  pre 
sented  in  or  to  any  such  Parsonage, 
Vicarage,  Prebend,  or  other  ecclesias 
tical  preferment,  other  than  such  per 
sons  as  shall  be  nominated  and  ap 
pointed  by  both  Houses  of  Parliament, 
as  aforesaid.  And  it  is  lastly  ordered, 
That  the  Lord  Archbishop,  and  the 
Churchwardens  of  every  parish,  and 
other  officers  of  the  Church,  where  any 
Parsonage,  Vicarage,  Prebend,  or  other 
ecclesiastical  promotions  or  prefer 
ments,  in  the  donation  or  gift  of  the 
said  Archbishop,  are,  shall  within  two 
months  after  the  respective  avoidance 
thereof,  give  notice  of  such  avoidance 
to  the  Lord  Speaker  of  the  House  of 
Peers  for  the  time  being."] 

1  [This  order  of  May  20  was  passed 
on  Corbet's  petition.  See  Lords' 
Journals,  vol.  vi.  p.  54.] 

m  ["May  23,  1643. 

"  The  humble  petition  of  Wm.  Arch 
bishop  of  Cant,  was  read, 
"  '  Shewing, 

"'That  he  hath  neither  land,  lease, 
nor  money;  that  the  small  store  of 
plate  which  he  had  is  long  since 
melted  down  for  his  necessary  support 
and  expenses,  caused  by  his  present 
troubles ;  that  his  rents  and  profits 


tenance ;  the  prayer  of  which  petition  was  as  follows : — 
'  Humbly  prayeth  that  your  Lps.  will  take  his  sad  condition 
into  your  honourable  l  consideration,  that  somewhat  may  be 
allowed  him  out  of  his  estate  to  supply  the  necessities  of  life  ; 
assuring  himself  that  in  honour  and  justice  you  will  not  suffer 
him  either  to  beg  or  starve.  And  your  petitioner  shall 2  ever 
204  pray,  &c.'  The  answer  which  this  petition  had  in  the  Lords' 
House  was,  '  Let  him  give  Chartham  as  is  ordered,  and  then 
we  will  consider  of  maintenance11/  So  my  petition  was  sent 
down  to  the  House  of  Commons3.  To  the  last  forenamed 
order,  I  gave  my  former  answer,  and  humbly  petitioned  the 
Lords  accordingly,  Maii  27  following  4  °.  So  they  departed, 
and  as  they  went  down  the  hill  together,  Sir  John  was  over 
heard  to  say  to  Mr.  Corbet  thus :  '  The  Archbishop  hath 
petitioned  the  Lords  for  maintenance,  and  they  have  sent  his 
petition  to  the  Commons ;  and  since  he  will  not  give  you  the 
benefice,  Fll  warrant  you  he  shall  have  no  maintenance.' 
And  so  accordingly  my  petition  was  rejected  in  the  House 
of  Commons. 

1  ['  honourable '  in  Lords'  Journals  '  lordships '] 

2  ['  shall '  omitted  in  Lords'  Journals.] 

3  [After  '  Commons.'  orig.  written,  '  To  the  forenamed  petition  of  Mr.'  and 
erased.]  4  ['and  humbly  .  .  .  following.'  in  marg.] 

are  sequestered,  and  now  all  his  goods  petition,  thought  fit  that  he  should 

taken  from  him,  and  no  maintenance  have  some  maintenance,  and  referred 

at  all  allowed  him  :  insomuch  that,  if  the  petition,  and  order  for  nominating 

some  friends  of  his  had  not,  in  com-  Corbet,  to  the  House  of  Commons.  See 

passion  of  his  wants,  sent  him  some  Lords'  Journals,  vol.  vi.  p.  58.J 

little  supply,  he  had  not  been  able  to  °  [The  Archbishop's  petition  of  May 

subsist  to  this  present ;  and  now  that  27  was  read  in  the  House  of  Lords 

this  supply  is  at  the  last,  he  humbly  May  30,  and  an  ordinance  made  to 

prayeth,  &c.  (as  in  text.)  W.  Cant.'  "]  command   Sir  Nath.  Brent  to    give 

n  [The  House,  on  the  Archbishop's  Corbet  institution  to  Chartham.] 



Mail  31.  THIS  was  Wednesday,  the  last  of  May :  it  was  the  Fast- 
day.  A  search  came  betimes  in  the  morning  into  the  Tower 
upon  all  the  prisoners,  for  letters  and  other  papers.  But 
I  have  some  reasons  to  think  the  search  had  a  special  aim 
at  me.  First,  because  following  me  thus  close  about  Char- 
tham  as  they  did,  I  conceive  they  were  desirous  to  see 
whether  I  had  any  such  letter  from  the  King  as  I  pre 
tended  :  if  I  had  not,  they  had  advantage  against  me  for  my 
falsehood ;  if  I  had,  they  meant  to  see  what  secret  passed 
from  his  Majesty  to  me.  Secondly,  because  I  had  lately 
petitioned  for  maintenance,  and  by  this  search  they  might 
see  what  I  had  by  me.  And  he  that  searched  my  chamber, 
told  me,  upon  occasion,  that  he  was  to  take  all  papers  which 
might  discover  delinquents'  estates.  Thirdly,  because  all 
other  prisoners  had  their  papers  re-delivered  them  before  the 
searchers  went  from  the  Tower,  except  some  few  verses  of 
Sir  Ed.  Hern's;  but  mine  were  carried  to  the  Committee, 
yet  with  promise,  that  I  should  have  them  again  within  two 
or  three  days.  Fourthly,  because  as  Layton  was  put  into 
Lambeth- House,  so  my  implacable  enemy,  Mr.  Pryn,  was 
picked  out  (as  a  man  whose  malice  might  be  trusted)  to 
make  the  search  upon  me.  And  he  did  it  exactly. 

The  manner  of  the  search  upon  me  was  thus: — Mr. Pryn 
came  into  the  Tower,  with  other  searchers,  so  soon  as  the 
gates  were  open.  Other  men  went  to  other  prisoners.  He 
made  haste  to  my  lodging,  commanded  the  warder  to  open 
my  doors,  left  two  musketeers  sentinels  1  below,  that  no  man 
might  go  in  or  out,  and  one  at  the  stair -head ,»  with  three 
other,  which  had  their  muskets  ready  cocked,  he  came  into 
my  chamber,  and  found  me  in  bed  (as  were  also  my  servants 
in  theirs).  I  presently  thought  upon  my  blessed  Saviour, 
when  Judas  led  in  the  swords  and  staves  about  Him.  Mr. 
Pryn,  seeing  me  safe  in  bed,  falls  first  to  my  pockets  to  rifle 
them ;  and  by  that  time  my  two  servants  came  running  in, 
1  ['sentinels'  in  inarg.] 



half  ready.  I  demanded  the  sight  of  his  warrant ;  he  showed 
it  me,  and  therein  was  expressed,  that  he  should  search  my 
pockets.  The  warrant il  came  from  the  Close  Committee,  and 
the  hands  that  were  to  it  were  these  :  —  E.  Manchester^ 
W.  Saye  and  Scale c,  Wharton  d,  H.  Vane e,  Gilbert  Gerard f, 
and  John  Pirn  e. 

Did  they  remember  when  they  gave  this  warrant,  how 
odious  it  was  to  Parliaments,  and  some  of  themselves,  to  have 
the  pockets  of  men  searched  ? 

(94)  When  my  pockets  had  been  sufficiently  ransacked, 
I  rose  and x  got  my  clothes  about  me,  and  so  half  ready,  with 
my  gowii  upon  my  shoulders,  he  held  me  in  the  search  till 
past  nine  of  the  clock  in  the  morning.  He  took  from  me 
twenty  and  one  bundles  of  papers,  which  I  had  prepared  for 
my  defence;  the  two  letters  before  named,  which  came  to 
me  from  his  gracious  Majesty  about  Chartham  and  my  other 
benefices 2 ;  the  Scottish  Service-book,  with  such  directions 

1  ['  rose  and '  interlined.] 

2  ['the  two  .  .  .  benefices;'  on  opposite  page.] 

a  The  warrant  may  be  found  in 
Fryn's  Breviate  of  the  Life  of  the 
Archbishop,  p.  28. 

["  By  virtue  of  an  order  of  both 
Houses  of  Parliament,  these  are  to 
authorize  and  require  you  to  repair 
unto  Colonel  JV1  an  waring  at  the 
Guild-Hall  to-morrow  morning,  about 
4  of  the  clock,  and  to  receive  from 
him  ten  foot  soldiers,  appointed  to 
attend  and  assist  you  in  the  service 
hereafter  mentioned.  And  you  are 
further  required  and  authorized,  with 
the  soldiers  before  mentioned,  to  re 
pair  unto  the  Tower  of  London,  and 
there  to  search  all  the  prisoners  re 
maining  under  restraint,  by  order  of 
either  of  the  Houses  of  Parliament,  or 
of  this  Committee,  and  to  seize  upon 
all  letters  and  papers,  and  to  see  them 
put  into  some  safe  place,  to  be  perused 
by  such  as  shall  be  thereunto  autho- 
rixed.  And  you  are  forthwith  to  cer 
tify  us,  what  you  shall  have  done  in 
execution  hereof;  and  in  the  mean 
time  so  to  sever  and  restrain  their  per 
sons,  that  they  speak  not  one  with 
another,  nor  with  any  other ;  that 
thereupon  some  further  order  and 
direction  may  be  given.  And  the 
said  Colonel  Manwaring',  as  also  the 

Lieutenant  of  the  Tower,  and  all 
other  his  Majesty's  officers  and  loving 
subjects,  are  hereby  required  to  be 
aiding  and  assisting  unto  you  in 
execution  of  the  premises.  And  for 
your  and  their  so  doing,  this  shall  be 
your  warrant."  (Signed  as  in  the 
text.)  "  To  William  Prinne,  of  Lin 
coln's  Inn,  Esq. ;  William  Ball,  Esq. ; 
Ralph  Farmer,  Gent. ;  William  Bendy, 
Gent. ;  Henry  Blake,  Gentleman."] 

6  [Edw.  Montagu,  mentioned  pre 
viously  in  this  history  as  Lord  Kim- 
bolton.  He  became  Earl  of  Man 
chester,  Nov.  7,  1642.] 

c  [William  Fiennes,  first  Viscount 
Say  and  Scale.  Laud's  inveterate  op 
ponent  .] 

d  [Philip  Wharton,  third  Baron 
Wharton.  He  was  at  the  battle  of 
Edge  Hill,  and  took  an  active  part  in 
the  rebellion.  He  lived  till  1696; 
and  became  Privy  Counsellor  to  Wil 
liam  III.] 

e  [Henry  Vane  the  younger.] 

f  "[Sir  Gilbert  Gerrard,  M.P.  for 

e  [M.P.  for  Tavistock.  The  active 
opponent  of  Straftbrd  and  Laud.  See 
his  character  in  Clarendon,  Hist,  of 
Rebellion,  vol.  iv.  p.  437.] 


as  accompanied  it;  a  little  book,  or  diary,  containing  all 
the  occurrences  of  my  life ;  and  my  Book  of  Private  Devo-  206 
tions ;  both  these  last  written  through  with  my  own  hand. 
Nor  could  I  get  him  to  leave  this  last ;  but  he  must  needs 
see  what  passed  between  God  and  me:  a  thing,  I  think, 
scarce  ever  offered  to  any  Christian.  The  last  place  which 
he  rifled,  was  a  trunk  which  stood  by  my  bed-side.  In  that 
he  found  nothing,  but  about  forty  pound  in  money  for  my 
necessary  expenses  (which  he  meddled  not  with),  and  a 
bundle  of  some  gloves.  This  bundle  he  was  so  careful  to 
open,  as  that  he  caused  each  glove  to  be  looked  into ;  upon 
this  I  tendered  him  one  pair  of  the  gloves,  which  he  refusing, 
I  told  him  he  might  take  them  and  fear  no  bribe,  for  he  had 
already  done  me  all  the  mischief  he  could,  and  I  asked  no 
favour  of  him,  So  he  thanked  me,  took  the  gloves,  bound 
up  my  papers,  left  two  sentinels  at  my  door,  which  were  not 
dismissed  till  the  next  day  noon,  and  went  his  way. 

I  was  somewhat  troubled  to  see  myself  used  in  this  man 
ner  ;  but  knew  no  help  but  in  God,  and  the  patience  which 
He  had  given  me.  And  how  His  gracious  providence  over 
me,  and  His  goodness  to  me,  wrought  upon  all  this,  I  shall 
in  the  end  discover,  and  will  magnify,  however  it  succeed 
with  me. 

OF   AHCHBlSllOP   LAUD.  27 

207  CAP.  XIX. 

UPON  my  last l  answer  to  the  House  concerning  Chartham, 
there  came  out  an  ordinance  against  me,  to  take  all  my  tem 
poralities  into  the  Parliament's  hands;  that  so  they  might 
give  not  only  Chartham,  but  all  things  else  which  fell  into 
my  gift :  and  because  it  is  an  ordinance  of  a  great  power 
and  extent,  I  shall  set  it  down,  as  it  was  printed  and  pub 
lished,  Junii  10,  being  Saturday  a. 

"  Whereas,  by  an  ordinance  of  the  Lords  and  Commons,  Junii  10, 
in  this  present  Parliament,  of  the  17th  of  May,  1643,  the1643' 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  is  required,  from  time  to  time 
until  his  trial,  to  collate  such  fit  persons  unto  any  ecclesias 
tical  preferment  in  his  patronage,  as  shall  by  both  Houses 
be  nominated  unto  him ;  and  in  pursuance  of  the  said  ordi 
nance,  another  ordinance  of  the  Lords  and  Commons,  passed 
the  20th  of  the  same  month,  requiring  the  said  Archbishop 
to  collate  upon  Ed.  Corbet,  Fellow  of  Merton  College  in  the 
University  of  Oxford,  the  Rectory  of  Chartham  in  the  county 
of  Kent,  void  by  the  death  of  Dr.  Bargrave,  the  last  incum 
bent  ;  and  whereas  the  said  Archbishop b  refuseth  obedience 
to  the  said  ordinance  :  It  is  therefore  ordered,  and  be  it  so 
ordained  by  the  Lords  and  Commons  in  Parliament,  that  all 
the  temporalities  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  be  hereby 
sequestered,  by,  and  unto  the  Parliament ;  and  William  L. 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  suspended c  ab  officio  et  beneficio, 
et  omni  et  omnimoda  jurisdictione  archiepiscopali,  until  he  be 
either  convicted  or  acquitted  of  high  treason,  for  which  he 
stands  now  accused ;  and  whatsoever  livings,  dignities,  or 
ecclesiastical  promotions,  in  the  said  Archbishop's  gift  or 
collation,  are,  or  hereafter  shall  be  void,  shall  henceforth  be 
instituted  and  inducted  unto  by  the  Archbishop's  Vicar- 

1   ['  last'  interlined.] 

a  It  maybe  found  also  in  Rushw.          b  '  of  Canterbury'  Rush*, 
par.  iii.  vol.  ii.  p.  330.  e  '  be  susp.'  Rushw. 


General,  or  any  other  having  authority  in  this  d  behalf/upon 
the  nomination  and  recommendation  of  both  Houses  of  Par 
liament,  during  the  time  of  the  suspension  and  sequestration 
aforesaid.  And  upon  this  ordinance  it  is  ordered,  and  be  it 
so  ordained  by  the  Lords  and  Commons  in  Parliament,  That 
the  said  Ed.  Corbet  be,  and  is  hereby  nominated  and  recom 
mended,  forthwith  upon  sight  hereof,  to  be  admitted,  insti 
tuted,  and  inducted  by  the  Vicar- General  aforesaid,  or  any 
other  having  authority  in  this e  behalf,  into  the  said  Rectory 
of  Chartham,  ratione  suspensions  Domini  Gulielmi  Archie- 
piscopi  Cantuariensis f  temporalium  archiepiscopatus,  in  mani- 
bus  supremcB  curia  Parliament},  jam  existentium,  the  same 
belonging  unto  their  gift.  And  it  is  hereby  further  ordained, 
by  the  Lords  and  Commons  in  Parliament,  That  during  the 
suspension  and  sequestration  aforesaid,  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  said  Archbishop  shall  be  executed  and  exercised  by  his 
Vicar- General,  and  other  his  inferior  judges  and  officers,  as 
formerly  the  same  hath  been." 

This  ordinance  was  laid  as  a  great  punishment  upon  me  : 
but  I  humbly  thank  both  Houses  for  it,  as  for  the  greatest 
benefit  they  have  bestowed  on  me  since  my  troubles;  espe 
cially  since  the  sequestration  of  my  jurisdiction,  Novemb.  2,  208 
16-41  s.  For  it  appears  before  in  this  history1,  how  ever  since 
that  time  I  have  been  troubled  for  every  (95)  benefice  which 
hath  fallen  in  my  gift ;  disenabled  to  prefer  any  friend  or 
chaplain  of  my  own,  were  he  never  so  worthy :  and  (which 
is  worse  by  much)  forced  to  admit  such  men,  how  unworthy 
soever,  as  were  by  them 2  nominated  to  me,  or  else  fall  under 
a  contempt  of  their  ordinances,  and  such  arbitrary  punish 
ment  as  they  shall  thereupon  load  me :  whereas  now,  I  am 
freed  both  from  the  trouble  and  the  sin  of  admitting  un 
worthy  persons  into  the  Church  service,  and  leave  them  to 
the  business,  and  the  account  for  it. 

Junii  n,         On  Sunday,   Junii  11,   one   came   and  preached   at   the 
Tower  (his  name  I  could  not  learn).     In  his  sermon,  after  he 

1  ['in  tins  history,'  on  opposite  page.] 

2  ['  by  thtm  '  in  nsar^.] 

d  'his'  Rushw.  f  'ctaefrucslrationi*'  Rush*, 

'his'  Rushvr.  s  [See  vol.  iii.  p  450.] 


had  liberally  railed  on  me,  he  told  the  auditory,  that  Mr.  Pryn 
had  found  a  book  in  ray  pocket,  which  would  discover  great 
things  :  this  to  inflame  the  people  against  me ;  et  si  non 
satis  insanircnt  sua  sponte,  instiyare  h.  This  is  zealous  preach 
ing  !  God  forgive  their  malice. 

An  ordinance  passed  on  Monday,  Junii  12,  that  the  Synod  Junii  12. 
of  Divines,  formerly  named  by  both  Houses,  (not  chosen  by 
the  Clergy,)  should  begin  to  sit  on  the  first  of  July  following  :  Julii  1. 
and  they  did  begin  to  sit  that  day;  Dr.  Twiss1  in  the 
chair;  and  he1  made  the  Latin  sermon.  The  names  of  these 
synodical  men  are  to  be  seen  in  the  ordinance,  printed 
Junii  12  k;  where  any  man  that  will,  may  see  a  great,  if 
not  the  greater  part  of  them,  Brownists2,  or  Independents, 
or  New-England-Ministers,  if  not  worse 3,  or  at  the  best 
refractory  persons  to  the  doctrine  or  discipline,  or  both,  of  the 
Church  of  England  established  by  law,  and  now  brought 
together  to  reform  it.  An  excellent  conclave !  But  I  pray 
God,  that  befal  not  them,  which  Tally  observes  fell  upon 
Epicurus,  Si  qua  corrigere  voluit,  deteriora  fecit  .-1  He  made 
everything  worse  that  he  went  about  to  mend.  I  shall  for 
my  part  never  deny,  but  that  the  Liturgy  of  the  Church  of 
England  may  be  made  better ;  but  I  am  sure  withal  it  may 
easily  be  made  worse.  And  howsoever,  it  would  become  this 
Synod  well,  to  remember,  that  there  is  a  Convocation  of  the 
English  Prelates  and  Clergy,  lawfully  chosen  and  summoned, 
and  by  no  supreme  or  legal  authority  as  yet  dissolved.  And 
can  there  be  two  national  Synods  at  one  time,  but  that  one 
must  be  irregular  ?  Belike  we  shall  fall  to  it  in  the  Dona- 
tists'  way :  they  set  up  altare  contra  altare  in  Africk ;  and 
these  will  set  up  synodum  contra  synodum  in  England :  and 
this,  without  God's  infinite  mercy,  will  bring  forth  a  schism, 
fierce  enough  to  rent  and  tear  religion  out  of  this  kingdom ; 
which  God,  for  the  merits  and  mercies  of  Christ,  forbid. 

he'  interlined.] 

Several  words  erased  after  ;  Brownists/] 
'if  not  worse/  in  marg.] 

h  [See  Terent.  Andr.  iv.  2.  9.]  worth,  par.iii.  vol.ii.  (i.e.  vol.  v.)  p.  337.] 
1  [Dr.  William  Twiss,  formerly  Fel-          !   Cicero,  L.  2.  Tuscu.  Q.     [The  fol 
low  of  New  College,  Vicar  of  New-  lowing  appears  to  be  the  passage  refer- 
bury.     Sec  his  life  in  Wood,  Ath.  Ox.  red  to  :  "Ita  ut  ea  quae  corrigere  vult 
iii.  369  seq.]  mihi   quidem  depravare  videatur."— 
k  [This  ordinance  is  given  in  Rush-  De  Fin.  lib.  i.  cap.  vi.] 


A  Committee  of  the  House  of  Commons  sent  Mr.  Dobsonm, 
my  Controller,  to  me  to  the  Tower,  to  require  me  to  send 
them  word  under  my  hand,  what  originals  I  had  of  the 
Articles  of  Religion  established,  156'?,  and  1571.  This  was1 

Julii  12.  on  Wednesday,  July  12.  And  I  returned  by  him  the  same 
day  this  answer  in  writing,  with  my  name  to  it : — "  The 
original  Articles  of  1571  I  could  never  find  in  my  paper-study 
at  Lambeth,  or  anywhere  else ;  and  whether  any  copy  of  them  . 
were  ever  left  there,  I  cannot  tell.  The  original  Articles 
of  1562,  with  many  hands  to  them,  I  did  see,  and  peruse 
there ;  but  whether  the  bishops'  hands  were  to  them  or  not, 
I  cannot  remember."  This  answer  satisfied  them;  but  what  209 
their  aim  was  I  cannot  tell,  unless  they  meant  to  make  a 
search  about  the  two  first  lines  in  the  twentieth  Article,  con 
cerning  the  power  of  the  Church ;  in  these  words :  "  The 
Church  hath  power  to  decree  rites  or  ceremonies,  and  autho 
rity  in  controversies  of  faith  :  "  which  words  are  left  out  in 
divers  printed  copies  of  the  Articles,  and  are  not  in  the  one- 
and-twentieth  Article  of  Edw.  VI.,  nor  in  the  Latin  copy  of 
the  Articles  1571 ;  but  in  the  original  Articles  of  1562,  the 
words  are  plain  and  manifest,  without  any  interlining  at  all. 
If  this  were  their  aim,  'tis  probable  we  shall  see  somewhat, 
by  what  their  Synod 2  shall  do  concerning  that  Article  n. 

Aug.  3.  On  Tuesday,  August  3,  my  servant,  Mr.  Edw.  Lenthrop, 

came  to  me,  and  told  me  that  the  day  before  he  met  with  Sir 
K.  Digbye,  who  had  the  leave  to  go  out  of  prison,  (by  the  suit 
of  the  French  Queen,)  and  to  travel  into  France.  But  before 
he  took  his  journey,  he  was  to  come  before  a  Committee,  and 
there,  he  said,  he  had  been3.  It  seems  it  was  some  Com 
mittee  about  my  business ;  for  he  told  Mr.  Lenthrop,  and 
wished  him  to  tell  it  me,  that  the  Committee  took  special 
notice  of  his  acquaintance  with  me,  and  examined  him 
strictly  concerning  me  and  my  religion,  whether  he  did  not 
know  that  I  was  offered  to  be  made  a  Cardinal ;  and  many 

i  [' waa*  in  maig.]  2  ['Synod'  in  marg.] 

3  ['  and  there  .  .  .  been.'  in  marg.] 

m  [Walter  Dobson.  The  Archbishop  more  fully  stated   by  the  Archbishop 

bequeathed  him  a  legacy  of  20£.     See  in  his  Speech  at  Bastwick,  Burton, 

Will.]  and  Pryime's  Censure,  pp.  82—84  in 

n  [The  evidence  in   favour  of  the  marg.     See  Works,  vol.  vi.] 
genuineness  of  this  disputed  clause,  is 


other  such  like  things.  That  he  answered  them,  That  lie 
knew  nothing  of  any  Cardinalship  offered  me :  and  for  my 
religion,  he  had  reason  to  think  I  was  truly  and  really  as 
I  professed  myself;  for  I  had  laboured  with  him  against  his 
return  to  the  Church  of  Rome :  (which  is  true,  and  I  have 
some  of  my  papers  yet  to  show.)  But  he  further  sent  me 
word,  that  their  malice  was  great  against  me  ;  though  he  saw 
plainly,  (96)  they  were  like  men  that  groped  in  the  dark,  and 
were  to  seek  what  to  lay  to  my  charge.  But  soon  after  mut- 
terings  arose,,  that  Mr.  Pryn  in  his  search  had  found  great 
matters  against  me,  and  that  now  I  should  be  brought  to 
trial  out  of  hand. 

Some  men  now,  it  seems,  made  overture  for  peace,  and 
some  good  hopes  of  it  began  to  show  themselves   (as  it  was 
then  said)  in  both  Houses.     This  was  on  Saturday,  Aug.  5  :  Aug.  5, 
but  there  wanted  not  those  which  made  themserVes  ready  for  1( 
battle  ;  for  on  Sunday,  Aug.  6,  printed  bills  were  pasted  up  Aug.  6. 
in  London,   to   animate  the  people  to   go  to  Westminster 
against  peace ;  and  the  like  bills  were  read  in  some  churches. 
Excellent   church-work !      And  on  Monday,   Aug.  7,   some  Aug.  7. 
thousands,  men  and  women,  went  to  the  Parliament,  and 
clamorously  petitioned  against  peace ;  and  the  next  day  five  Aug.  8. 
or  six  hundred  women,  and  these1  were  as  earnest  for  peace: 
but  ye  may  observe,   'tis  but  hundreds  for  thousands  that 
came  against  it.     Yet  on  Wednesday,  Aug.  9,  the  number  of  Aug.  9. 
women  increased,  when,  it   seems,  men  durst  not  appear. 
But  their  desire  for  peace  was  answered  by  some  troops  of 
horse  which  were  sent  for,  by  which  some  of  the  women  were 
killed,  and  divers  of  them  shrewdly  wounded.     God  of  His 
mercy  set  an  end  to  these  bloody  distractions  !    In  the  midst 
of  this  fury  of  the  people,  on  Thursday,  Aug.  10,  came  out  Aug.  10. 
'Rome's  Master-Piece0.'     This  book  Mr. Pryn  sets  forth  in 
print,  upon  occasion  of  some  papers  which  he  had  in  his 
search  taken  from  me ;  and  'twas  done  to  drive  the  people 
210  headlong   into  mischief,  whose  malice  against  me2  needed 
not   his  setting  on.       After   this    the   Diurnal    and    other 

1  ['these' interlined.]  2  ['me' interlined.] 

0  [This  production,  with  the  Archbishop's  marginal  notes,  will  be  found  in 
vol.  vi.] 


pamphlets  began  to  mention  me,  and  that  now  a  charge  was 
drawing  up  against  me. 

Aug.  11.  Upon  Friday,  Aug.  11,  Sir  Robert  Harlowe  was  made 
Lieutenant  of  the  Tower,  in  the  room  of  Sir  Jo.  Conniers ; 

Aug.  15.  and  on  Tuesday,  Aug,  15,  he  removed  Mr.  Bray,  who  had 
been  my  warder  from  my  first  commitment  to  the  Tower,  and 
put  Mr.  Cowes,  another  of  the  warders,  to  be  my  keeper. 

Aug.  19.  The  cause  of  this  change  I  could  never  learn.  The  nineteenth 
of  Aug.  after,  being  Saturday,  Alderman  Pennington,  then 
Lord  Mayor  of  London,  was  made  Lieutenant  of  the  Tower, 
and  took  possession  of  it. 

Aug.  20.  The  next  day  being  Sunday,  in  the  afternoon  one  preached 
in  the  Tower  church  in  a  buff-coat  and  a  scarf,  but  had  a 
gown  on.  He  told  the  people,  they  were  all  blessed  that 
died  in  this  cause,  with  much  more  such  stuff.  His  name 
(as  I  then  heard)  was  KemP,  parson  or  vicar  of  Loe-Layton^, 
in  Essex,  and  then  captain  of  a  troop  of  horse.  Quam  bene 

Aug.  27.  conveniunt r!  But  the  next  Sunday,  Aug.  27,  during  the 
afternoon  sermon,  a  letter,  subscribed  John  Browne,  was 
thrust  under  the  door  of  my  prison.  When  I  opened  it,  I 
found  it  a  most  bitter  libel.  God  forgive  the  author  of  it ! 

September  On  Monday,  Septem.  11,  the  new  Lieutenant,  the  Lord 
Mayor,  changed  my  warder  again,  removed  Mr.  Cowes,  and 
put  Mr.  Spencer  to  attend  me.  And  when  I  moved  him,  that 
I  might  not  have  such  often1  change  put  upon  me,  as  no 
other  prisoner  had,  his  answer  was,  that  if  he  did  not  remove 
Mr.  Cowes,  the  Committee  would.  So  I  knew  not  how  to 
help  myself,  but  by  patience. 

Then  came  the  Covenant,  that  excellent  piece  of 

from  Scotland,  and  was  sworn  by  the  Parliament  and  the 

Scptemb.  Synod,  in  St.  Margaret's  Church  in  Westminster,  on  Monday, 
September  25.  The  effects  which  followed  were  as  strict  as 

Octol>.  3.  the  Covenant ;  for  on  Monday,  Octob.  3,  the  order  made  that 
time  twelvemonth  was  renewed,  and  all  prisoners  locked  up, 
and  no  man  suffered  to  speak  with  them,  but  by  leave  from 
the  Lieutenant,  and  in  the  presence  of  their  several  warders 

1  ['often'  in  margin.] 

P  [Samuel  Kerne,  or  Kern.     See  a         i  Low-Laighton. 
full  account  of  him,  Wood,  Ath.  Ox.          r  [See  Ovid,  Metam.  ii.  846.] 
iii.  907  ] 



211  CAP.  XX. 

BY  this  time  Mr.  Pryn's  malice  had  hammered  out  some-" 
thing;  and  on  Tuesday,  Octob.  24,  an  order  was  brought  me  Oetob.24. 
from  the  Lords,  dated  Octob.  23,  with  a  copy  of  ten  additional 
Articles a,  brought  up   by  the  Commons  against  me.     This 

r  a  See  the  Articles,  and  Order  of  the 
Lords  made  thereupon,  apud  Kush- 
worth,  par.  iii.  vol.  ii.  pp.  817,  820  ; 
apud  Pr.  pp.  33 — 41. 

[Such  of  the  additional  Articles  as 
are  not  mentioned  in  the  following 
History,  are  here  given  from  Pr^nne's 
Cant.  Doom,  pp.  38 — 40. 

"1.  That  the  said  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  to  introduce  an  arbitrary 
government  within  this  realm,  and  to 
destroy  Parliaments,  in  the  third  and 
fourth  years  of  his  Majesty's  reign 
that  now  is,  a  Parliament  being  then 
called  and  sitting  at  Westminster, 
traitorously  and  maliciously  caused 
the  said  Parliament  to  be  dissolved, 
to  the  great  grievance  of  his  Majesty's 
subjects,  and  prejudice  of  the  common 
wealth  ;  and  soon  after  the  dissolu 
tion  thereof,  gave  divers  propositions 
under  his  hand  to  George,  then  Duke 
of  Buckingham,  casting  therein  many 
false  aspersions  upon  the  said  Parlia 
ment,  calling  it  a  factious  Parliament, 
and  falsely  affirming  that  it  had  cast 
many  scandals  upon  his  Majesty,  and 
had  used  him  like  a  child  in  his  mi 
nority,  styling  them  Puritans,  and 
commending  the  Papists  for  harmless 
and  peaceable  subjects. 

"4.  That  for  the  end  and  purpose 
aforesaid  (to  advance  the  Canons  and 
power  ecclesiastical  above  the  law  of 
the  land),  about  seven  years  last  past, 
a  judgment  being  given  in  his  Ma 
jesty's  Court  of  King's  Bench  against 
one  Burley,  a  parson,  being  a  man  of 
bad  life  and  conversation,  in  an  infor 
mation  upon  the  statute  of  21  Hen. 
VIII.  for  wilful  non-residency,  the 
said  Archbishop,  by  solicitations  and 
other  undue  means  used  to  the  judges 
of  the  court,  caused  execution  upon 
the  said  judgment  to  be  stayed;  and 
being  moved  therein,  and  made  ac- 
LAUD. — VOL.  iv. 

quainted  with  the  bad  life  and  con 
versation  of  the  said  person,  he  said 
that  he  had  spoken  to  the  judges  for 
him,  and  that  he  would  never  suffer  a 
judgment  to  pass  against  any  Clergy 
man  by  niliil  dicit. 

"  8.  That  the  said  Archbishop, 
about  four  years  last  past,  at  West 
minster  aforesaid,  said  that  there 
must  be  a  blow  given  to  the  Church, 
such  as  hath  not  been  yet  given,  before 
it  could  be  brought  to  conformity; 
declaring  thereby  his  intention  to  be 
to  shake  and  alter  the  true  Protestant 
religion  established  in  the  Church  of 

"  10.  That  a  little  before  the  calling 
of  the  last  Parliament,  anno  1640,  a 
vote  being  then  passed,  and  a  resolu 
tion  taken  at  the  Council  Table,  by 
the  advice  of  the  said  Archbishop,  for 
assisting  of  the  King  in  extraordinary 
ways,  if  the  said  Parliament  should 
prove  peevish,  and  refuse  to  supply 
his  Majesty ;  the  said  Archbishop 
wickedly  and  maliciously  advised  his 
Majesty  to  dissolve  the  said  Parlia 
ment,  and  accordingly  the  same  was 
dissolved.  And  presently  after,  the 
said  Archbishop  told  his  Majesty  that 
now  he  was  absolved  from  all  rules  of 
government,  and  left  free  to  use  extra 
ordinary  ways  for  his  supply. 

"  For  all  which  matters  and  things 
the  said  Commons  assembled  in  Par 
liament,  in  the  name  of  themselves 
and  of  all  the  Commons  of  England, 
do  impeach  the  said  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury  of  high  treason,  and  other 
crimes  and  misdemeanours,  tending 
to  the  subversion  of  our  religion,  laws, 
and  liberties,  and  to  the  utter  ruin  of 
this  Church  and  Commonwealth. 

"  And  the  said  Commons,  by  pro 
testation  saving  to  themselves  the 
liberty  of  exhibiting  at  any  time 



order  required  me  to  make  my  answer  in  writing  by  the 
thirtieth  of  the  same  month.  These  Articles  charged  me  not 
with  treason  only,  as  the  former  did,  but  with  '  treason,  arid 
other  high  crimes  and  misdemeanours/  I  sent  instantly  by 
the  same  messenger  a  patitionb  for  longer  time;  for  means 
out  of  my  estate  to  fee  my  counsel,  and  bear  the  necessary 
charge  of  my  trial ;  for  counsel,  and  for  a  solicitor,  and  some 
servants  to  attend  my  business.  The  Lords,  I  humbly 

thank  them,  gave  me  longer  time,  and 


me  Mr. 

hereafter,  any  further  or  other  accusa 
tion  or  impeachment  against  the  said 
William  Laud,  Archbishop  of  Canter 
bury,  and  also  of  replying  to  the 
answer  that  he  shall  make  unto  the 
said  Articles,  or  any  of  thorn,  or  offer 
ing  proof  of  the  premises,  or  any  other 
impeachments  or  accusations  that 
shall  be  exhibited  by  them,  as  the 
cause  shall  (according  to  the  course  of 
Parliament)  require ;  do  pray  that  he, 
the  said  William  Laud,  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  may  be  called  to  an 
swer  the  said  several  crimes  and  mis 
demeanours,  and  receive  such  condign 
punishment  as  the  same  shall  deserve; 
and  that  such  further  proceedings 
may  be  upon  every  of  them  had  and 
used  against  him  as  is  agreeable  to 
law  and  justice." 

The  order  of  the  Lords  is  as  fol 
lows  :  — 

"Die  Ltmse,  23  October,  1643. 
Ordered,  by  the  Lords  in  Parliament, 
That  the  Lord  Archbishop  of  Canter 
bury  shall  put  in  his  answer  in  writing 
into  this  House  by  the  thirtieth  day 
of  this  instant  October,  unto  the  par 
ticular  Articles,  in  maintenance  of 
their  former  impeachment  of  high 
treason,  and  divers  high  crimes  and 
misdemeanours,  brought  up  from  the 
House  of  Commons  against  him,  and 
remaining  now  before  the  Lords  in 

b  The  A.B.'s  petition  may  be  found 
in  Rushw.  p.  820  ;  Pryn,  p.  41. 

["  To  the  Honourable  the  Lords  as 
sembled  in  the  High  Court  of  Par 

"The  humble  petition  of  William. 
Laud,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 

"  Humbly  sheweth, 
"  That  he  hath  received  your  Lord 
ships'  order  of  October  23,  1643,  with 
a  copy  of  the  Articles  charged  against 
him,  and  requiring  him  to  make  answer. 
"  Most    humbly  prayeth  that,   ac 

cording  to  an  order  of  that  honourable 
House,  he  may  have  counsel  assigned 
him,  and  that  Master  Hcarne  and 
Master  Chute  may  be  his  counsel,  and 
may  have  free  liberty  to  come  unto 
him;  and  that  he  may  have  some 
money  out  of  his  estate  to  fee  his 
counsel,  and  defray  his  other  charges, 
he  having  been  for  the  last  whole  year 
burdensome  to  his  friends.  And  fur 
ther,  that  he  may  have  all  his  papers 
and  books,  most  of  which  belong  to 
his  defence,  which  Master  Prynne 
took  from  him  by  order  of  the  Lords, 
delivered  unto  him,  that  he  may  be 
able  to  answer  for  himself.  That  also 
he  may  have  time  and  means  to  send 
for  his  witnesses,  which  can  hardly  be 
done  in  the  time  limited.  And  that 
he  may  have  his  servants  about  him, 
to  send  about  his  necessary  occasions. 
And,  lastly,  that  he  may  have  longer 
time,  the  Articles  being  large  and 

"And  he  shall  ever  pray,  &c. 

"  W.  CANT."] 

c  Hern  and  Chute  were  assigned 
by  order  of  the  Lords,  Octob.  24; 
Hales  added  by  their  order,  Octob.  28. 
See  both  orders,  apud  Hush  worth, 
p.  821  ;  Pryn,  pp.  41,  42.  Gerrard 
added  by  their  order,  Jan.  16.  See 
this  order  also,  ibid.  p.  825,  and  46. 
The  first  order,  apud  Heylin's  Life 
of  Laud,  p.  513.  [The  orders  are  here 
added : — 

"  Die  Martis,  24  October,  1643. 
Upon  the  reading  of  the  petition  of 
the  Lord  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
this  day,  in  the  House,  it  is  ordered 
by  the  Lords  in  Parliament,  That 
time  is  given  him  until  Monday,  the 
sixth  of  November,  for  the  putting  in 
his  answer  in  writing  into  this  House, 
unto  the  particular  Articles  brought 
up  from  the  House  of  Commons  in 
maintenance  of  their  former  impeach 
ment  of  high  treason,  and  divers  high 



Hearnd,  Mr.  Chute6,  Mr.  Hales f;  and,  at  my  petition,  added 
Mr.  Gerrard  g.  For  money  they  referred  me  to  the  Committee 
of  Sequestrations ;  but  delayed  their  answer  concerning  my 
servants,  and  the  papers  of  my  defence  which  Mr.  Pryn  took 
from  me.  For  though  he  promised  me  a  faithful  restitution 
of  them  within  three  or  four  days,  yet  to  this  day  (being 
almost  five  months  after)  I  had  received  but  three  bundles  of 
the  twenty  and  one,  which  he  had  from  me. 

Friday,  Octob.  27,  I  petitioned  again,  that  the  papers  of  Octob.  27. 
my  defence,  being,  as  I  was  informed,  in  the  hands  of  the 
Close  Committee,  might  be  deli(97)vered  unto  me;  and  sent 
my  petition,  with  the  order  of  the  Lords  annexed,  to  the 
Committee  for  Sequestrations.  There  many  were  very 
favourable,  till  Mr.  Glyn  h  was  pleased  to  say,  They  were  not 

crimes  and  misdemeanours,  against 
him.  That  Master  Hearne  and  Master 
Chute  are  hereby  assigned  of  counsel 
for  the  drawing  up  of  his  answer,  who 
are  to  be  permitted  to  have  free  access 
in  and  out  to  him.  That  this  House 
doth  hereby  recommend  to  the  Com 
mittee  of  Sequestrations,  that  the  said 
Lord  Archbishop  shall  have  such 
means  afforded  him  out  of  his  estate 
as  will  enable  him  to  pay  his  counsel, 
and  defray  his  other  charges.  That 
when  his  Lordship  shall  set  down 
particularly  what  papers  and  writings 
are  necessary  for  his  defence  that 
should  be  restored  unto  him,  their 
Lordships  will  take  it  into  their  consi 
deration.  That  upon  his  Lordship's 
nominating  who  shall  be  his  solicitor, 
the  Lords  will  return  their  answer. 
And  for  the  witnesses,  when  a  day 
shall  be  appointed  for  his  Lordship's 
trial,  this  House  will  give  such  direc 
tions  therein  as  shall  be  just." 

'  "  Die  Sabbati,  28  October,  1643. 
Ordered  by  the  Lords  in  Parliament, 
That  Master  Hales  is  hereby  ap 
pointed  to  be  of  counsel  with  the  Lord 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  with  his 
other  counsel  already  appointed  for 
the  drawing  of  his  answer  to  the 
charge  of  the  House  of  Commons 
against  him.  And  that  Master  W. 
Dell,  Richard  Cobb,  and  Master 
George  Smith,  his  Lordship's  ser 
vants,  shall  have  liberty  to  attend  the 
said  Archbishop's  several  affairs,  and 
be  permitted  to  come  in  and  out  unto 
him,  as  there  shall  be  occasion." 

"  Die    Martis,     16     Jan.    1643. 
Upon  the  reading    the    petition   of 

William,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
it  is  this  day  ordered  by  the  Lords 
in  Parliament,  That  Mr.  Richard 
Gerrard,  of  Gray's  Inn,  be  added  to 
the  former  counsel  assigned  to  the 
said  Archbishop,  to  be  likewise  of  his 
counsel.  It  is  also  ordered  by  the 
Lords  in  Parliament,  That  William, 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  shall  put 
in  his  answer  in  writing  into  this 
House,  to  the  first  and  further  Arti 
cles  of  Impeachment  brought  up  from 
the  House  of  Commons  against  him, 
by  Monday  morning  next  perempto 
rily,  and  that  the  same  counsel  for 
merly  assigned  him  shall  be  of  counsel 
with  him."] 

d  [John  Hearne.  From  a  letter  in 
Peck's  Desiderata  Curiosa,  p.  556, 
written  by  one  of  his  grandchildren, 
it  appears  that  he  received  the  Holy 
Communion  with  the  Archbishop  just 
before  his  death ;  and  that  the  Arch 
bishop  wished  him  to  attend  him  on 
the  scaffold.  He  desired  to  be  excused 
this  service,  and  his  son  attended  in 
his  stead.  The  same  letter  contains 
an  account  of  a  proposal  to  coin  a 
medal  from  the  gold  pieces  which  the 
Archbishop  gave  the  younger  Hearne 
on  this  occasion.] 

e  [Chaloner  Chute,  son  of  Arthur 
Chute,  of  Wrenham,  in  Suffolk.  His 
son,  Chaloner  Chute,  was  Speaker  of 
the  House  of  Commons  in  Rich.  Crom 
well's  Parliament.  (Wood,F.O.i.454.)] 

f  [Afterwards  the  celebrated  Sir 
Matthew  Hale.] 

9  [Richard  Gerrard.] 

h  [M. P.  for  Westminster,  afterwards 
Scrgcant-at-law,  Chief  Justice  of  the 

D   2 


to  allow  me  means,  and  there  was  a  known  course  in  law, 
which  was1,  that  I  might  go  on  in  forma  pauperis ;  and  so 
I  was2  left  without  any  allowance  out  of  my  estate,  to  fee  my 
counsel,  or  supply  other  wants. 

This  succeeding  so  ill  with  me,  I  petitioned  the  Lords 

Octob.  28,  again  on  Saturday,  Octob.  28,  and  then  Mr.  Dell,  my  secre 
tary,  was  assigned  me  for  my  solicitor,  and  I  was  allowed  two 
servants  more  to  go  about  my  business1;  and  the  House  of 
Commons  by  their  order  agreed  to  the  Lords,  that  I  should 
have  copies  of  any  of  the  papers  taken  from  me;  but  it 
should  be  at  my  own  charge.  Wonderful  favour  this,  and  as 
much  justice!  My  estate  all  taken  from  me,  and  my  goods 
sold,  before  ever  I  came  to  hearing ;  and  then  I  may  take 
copies  of  my  papers  at  my  own  charge  ! 

Octob.  31.  On  Tuesday,  Octob.  31,  I  humbly  petitioned1'  the  Lords 
for  direction  of  my  counsel  how  to  carry  themselves  towards 
me  and  my  defence;  and  that  they  would  honourably  be 

['  was,'  interlined.] 

['was'  interlined.] 

Upper  Bench,  and  one  of  Cromwell's 


'  See  the  order  of  the  Lords,  apud 
Kushw.  p.  821 ;  Pryn,  p.  42.  [See 
above,  note  c.] 

k  The  petition  may  be  found,  apud 
Kushw.  p.  821;  Pryn,  p.  42. 
["  To  the  Right  Honourable  the  Lords 
assembled  in  Parliament, 

"The  humble  petition  of  Wil 
liam,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 

"  Most  humbly  sheweth, 
"  That  your  petitioner  having  pre 
sented  against  him,  by  the  honour 
able  Hou.-e  of  Commons,  to  your 
Lordships,  an  impeachment,  intituled, 
'  Further  Articles  of  Impeachment  by 
the  Commons  assembled  in  Parlia 
ment,  of  High  Treason,  and  divers 
High  Crimes  and  Misdemeanours;'  to 
which  by  your  honourable  order  of 
the  twenty-fourth  of  October  annexed, 
he  is  directed  to  put  in  his  answer  in 
writing,  by  Monday  the  sixth  of  No 
vember,  and  hath  thereby  counsel 
assigned  him  to  draw  up  the  same  ; 

"  That  your  petitioner's  counsel, 
upon  reading  of  the  Articles,  finding 
that  as  well  in  the  frame  as  the  conclu 
sion  thereof,  the  matters  of  crime  and 
misdemeanours  are  so  interwoven  with 
the  matters  thereby  charged  as  treason, 
as  they  cannot  take  upon  themselves 

to  distinguish  them  ;  and  conceiving 
it  not  to  have  been  your  Lordships' 
intention  by  their  assignments,  that 
they  should  advise  an  answer  to  any 
part  of  the  impeachment  charged 
against  your  petitioner  as  treason,  do 
forbear  to  advise  your  petitioner's 
answer  to  the  said  Articles,  without 
some  declaration  first  had,  which  of 
the  said  Articles  are  intended  to  be  a 
charge  of  high  treason,  and  which  of 
them  of  crimes  and  misdemeanours, 
without  which  your  petitioner  is  like 
to  be  deprived  of  the  assistance  of 
counsel  granted  by  your  Lordships' 

"  Your  petitioner  humbly  beseech- 
eth  your  Lordships,  in  this  so  heavy 
a  charge  on  him,  from  so  great  and 
honourable  a  body,  in  such  a  strait  of 
time,  That  it  may  be  declared  which 
of  the  said  Articles  are  intended  to  be 
charges  of  crimes  and  misdemeanours 
only,  in  which  your  petitioner  may 
have  the  assistance  of  his  counsel 
assigned  him  to  advise  him  in  his 
answer  thereunto ;  and  that  your 
Lordships  will  be  further  honourably 
pleased  to  enlarge  your  petitioner  in 
the  time  allotted  for  his  answer. 

"And  your  petitioner  shall  pray, 
&c.  "W.  CANT."] 


pleased,  in  regard  the  Articles  charged  me  with  treason 
and  misdemeanour,  and  were  intermixed  one  with  another, 
to  distinguish  which  were  for  treason,  and  which  for  misde 
meanour  :  as  also  for  longer  time  to  put  in  my  answer.  The 
Lords  upon  this  gave  an  order  that  I  should  have  time  till 
212  Novemb.  13,  but  would  declare  no  opinion  touching  the  dis- 
tinguishment  of  the  Articles,  but  left  me  to  my  counsel  to 
advise  as  they  pleased l.  My  counsel  told  me  plainly,  I  were  as 
good  have  no  counsel,  if  the  Articles  were  not  distinguished; 
for  they  were  so  woven  one  with  another,  and  so  knit  up 
together  in  the  conclusion,  that  they  might  refer  all  to 
treason,  and  so  they  be1  suffered  to  give  me  no  counsel  at  all 
in  matter  of  fact.  Hereupon  they  drew  me  another  petition 
to  the  same  effect,  which  I  caused  to  be  delivered  Novemb.  6 ;  Novemb. 6. 
but  it  received  the  same  answer.  Then  Novemb.  7,  being  Novemb.7. 
Wednesday  [Tuesday],  I  petitioned  the  House  of  Commons 
to  the  same  purpose  ;  and  Novemb.  8,  this  my  petition  was  Novemb.8. 
read  in  the  House  of  Commons,  and,  after  a  short  debate, 
the  resolution  was,  that  they,  being  my  accusers,  would  not 
meddle  with  anything,  but  left  all  to  the  order  of  the  Lords, 
before  whom  the  business  was,  and  my  counsel's  own  judgment 
thereupon.  This  seemed  very  hard,  not  only  to  myself  and 
my  counsel,  but  to  all  indifferent  men  that  heard  it.  In 
the  meantime  I  could  resort  no  whither  but  to  patience  and 
God's  mercy. 

Novemb.  13,  I  appeared  in  the  Parliament-house  according  Novemb. 
to  the  order111,  and  was  at  the  bar.     That  which  I  spake  to  13< 
the  Lds.  was  this, — "  That  I  had  no  skill  to  judge  of  the 
i  [« be '  interlined.] 

1  See  the  order  of  the  Lords,  ibid.  822. 

[Rushworth,]  p.  822  ;  [Prynne,  p.]  42.  ["  Die  Veneris,  10  Novemb.  1643. 

["Die  Martis,  31  Octobris.  Or-  Ordered,  That  the  Lieutenant  of  the 
dered  by  the  Lords  in  Parliament,  Tower,  or  his  deputies,  shall  bring  in 
That  the  Lord  Archbishop  of  Canter-  safety  the  Lord  Archbishop  of  Canter 
bury  shall  have  time  to  put  in  his  bury  before  their  Lordships,  on  ^Ion- 
answer  to  the  impeachment  of  the  day,  the  thirteenth  of  this  instant 
House  of  Commons  until  Monday  the  November,  by  ten  of  the  clock  in  the 
thirteenth  of  November  next.  And  morning,  to  put  in  his  answer  into 
that  this  House  doth  forbear  to  de-  the  House  to  the  impeachment  of  the 
clare  any  opinion  concerning  the  House  of  Commons  remaining  now 
several  Articles  of  the  said  impeach-  before  the  Lords  in  Parliament,  and 
ment,  but  leaves  it  to  his  counsel  to  this  to  be  a  sufficient  warrant  in  that 
do  and  advise  as  his  counsel  shall  behalf, 
think  most  fitting."]  "  To  the  Gentleman  Usher,  &c."] 

m  See  the  order,  apud  Rushw.   p. 


straits  into  which  I  might  fall  by  my  plea,  which  I  had 
resolved  on,  being  left  without  all  assistance  of  my  counsel, 
in  regard  of  the  nature  and  form  of  the  impeachment  that 
was  against  me.  That  yet  my  innocency  prompted  me  to 
a  ready  obedience  of  their  Lps'.  order,  casting  myself  wholly 
upon  God's  mercy,  their  Lps'.  justice,  and  my  own  inno 
cency."  Then  I  humbly  desired  that  their  Lps'.  order  first, 
and  the  impeachment  after,  might  be  read l.  This  done, 
I  put  in  my  answer  in  writing,  as  I  was  ordered  to  do,  and 
humbly  prayed  it  might  be  entered.  My  answer  was, — "  All 
advantages  of  law  against  this  impeachment  saved  and  re 
served  to  this  defendant,  he  pleads  'Not  guilty'  to  all  and 
every  part  of  the  impeachment,  in  manner  and  form  as  'tis 
charged  in  the  Articles0;"  and  to  this  answer  I  put  my  hand. 

My  answer  being  thus  put  in,  I  humbly  besought  their 
Lps.  to  take  into  their  honourable  consideration  my  great 
years,  being  threescore  and  ten  complete,  and  my  memory 
and  other  faculties  by  age  and  affliction  much  decayed :  my 
long  imprisonment,  wanting  very  little  of  three  whole  years, 
and  this  last  year  little  better  than  close  imprisonment :  my 
want  of  skill  and  knowledge  in  the  laws  to  defend  myself: 
the  generality  and  incertainty  of  almost  all  the  Articles,  so 
that  I  cannot  see  any  particulars  against  which  I  may  provide 

In  the  next  place,  I  did  thankfully  acknowledge  their  Lps'. 
honourable  favour  in  assigning  me  such  counsel  as  I  desired ; 
but  I  told  their  Lps.  withal,  that  as  my  counsel  were  most 
ready  to  obey  their  Lps.  in  all  the  commands  laid  upon  them, 
so  there  were  certain  doubts  arisen  in  them  how  far  they 
might  advise  me  without  offence;  considering  the  charges 
against  me  were  so  interwoven,  and  left  without  all  distin- 
guishment  what  is  intended  as  a  charge  of  treason,  and  what  213 
of  crime  and  misdemeanour.  That,  to  remove  these  doubts, 

1  ['might  be  read.' in  margin.] 

D  Rushworth,  p.  822 ;    Pryn,  peachment   to  this   defendant  saved 

p.   43.      This    answer    is    otherwise  and  reserved,  this  defendant  humbly 

worded  m  Pryn's  Compl.  Hist.  p.  43,  saith  that  he  is  Not  guilty  of  all  or 

who  took  it  (I  suppose)  from  the  Par-  any  the  matters  by  the  said  impeach- 

liament  Records.— W.  S.  A.  C.     It  is  ment  charged,  in  such  manner  and 

thus  worded,— "  All  advantages  of  ex-  form  as  the   same  are   by  the  said 

ception  to  the  said  Articles  of  Im-  Articles  of  Impeachment  charged." 


I  had  humbly  besought  their  Lps.  twice  for  distinguishment, 
by  several  petitions;  that  their  Lps.  not  thinking  it  fit  to 
distinguish,,  I  have,  without  advice  of  counsel,  put  in  my  plea, 
as  their  Lps.  see.  But  do  most  humbly  pray,  that-  their 
Lps.  will  take  me  so  far  into  consideration,  as  that  I  may  not 
lose  the  benefit  of  my  counsel  for  law  in  (98)  all,  or  any;  and 
for  law  and  fact,  in  whatsoever  is  not  charged  as  treason, 
when  it  shall  be  distinguished  :  as  still  my  prayers  were,  that 
by  their  Lps'.  wisdom  and  honourable  direction,  some  way 
might  be  found  to  distinguish  them  :  and  that  having  (not 
without  much  difficulty)  prevailed  with  my  counsel  to  attend, 
their  Lps.  would  be  pleased  to  hear  them  speak  in  this 
perplexed  business. 

While  I  was  speaking  this,  the  Lds.  were  very  attentive, 
and  two  of  them  took  pen  and  paper  at  the  table,  and  took 
notes ;  and  it  was  unanimously  granted  that  my  counsel 
should  be  heard;  and  so  they  were.  And  the  order0  then 
made  upon  their  hearing  was,  that  they  should  advise  me, 
and  be  heard  themselves  in  all  things  concerning  matter  of 
law,  and  in  all  things,  whether  of  law  or  fact,  that  was?  not 
charged  as  treason ;  and  that  they  would  think  upon  the 
distinguishment  in  time  convenient.  This  was  all  I  could 
get,  and  my  counsel  seemed  somewhat  better  content,  that 
they  had  gotten  so  much.  Not  long  after  this,  I  heard  from 
good  hands,  that  some  of  the  Lords  confessed  I  had  much 
deceived  their  expectation ;  for  they  found  me  in  a  calm,  but 
thought  I  would  have  been  stormy.  And  this  being  so, 
I  believe  the  two  lords  so  careful  at  their  pen  and  ink  made 
ready  to  observe  any  disadvantages  to  me,  which  they 

0  See  the   order,  apud   Kushw.   p.  "  Ordered,  That  the  Committee  for 

822  ;  Pryn,  p>43.  the  trial  of  the  Archbishop  of  Cantcr- 

["Die    Lunac,    13    Novemb.    1643.  bury  do  meet  this  afternoon,  at  two  of 

Ordered  by  the  Lords  in  Parliament,  the  clock,   in   the  Star  Chamber,  to 

That  the  Lord  Archbishop  of  Canter-  prepare    the    evidence    against     the 

bury's    counsel    shall   provide    them-  Archbishop    of    Canterbury,   and   to 

selves  to  advise  him  in  point  of  law,  summon  such  witnesses  as  are  needful, 

in  all  the  Articles  of  the  whole  charge;  arid  prepare  the  business  fit  for  trial, 

and  for  the  matter  of  fact,  when  the  and  to  acquaint  the  House  when  they 

cause  comes  to  be  prosecuted  by  the  are  ready  ;   and  this  they  are  to  do 

House  of  Commons,  as  there  shall  be  with  all  convenient  speed  they  can, 

need,  their  Lordships  will  give  further  and  to  have  power  to  send  for  parties, 

directions  in  due  time."  witnesses,  papers,  records,  &c.     And 

On    the    llth   of    December    the  the  care  thereof  is  particularly  com-  • 

House  oi  Commons  made  this  ensuing  mitted  unto  Sergeant  Wilde."] 

order:—  P  '  were' 


thought  choler  arid  indignation  might  thrust  forth.  But 
I  praise  God  the  giver,  I  am  better  acquainted  with  patience 
fchan  they  think  I  am1. 

So  this  my  main  business  stayed  awhile.  In  the  meantime, 

Deccmb.  8,  that  I  might  not  rust,  I  was  warned,  Decemb.  8,  to  appear  in 
Parliament  the  18th  of  that  month,  as  a  collateral  defendant 
in  a  case  of  Smart  against  Dr.  Cosin,  formerly  heard  in  the 
High  Commission  <i.  This  cause  had  been  called  upon2  both 
in  this  and  former  Parliaments;  but  I  never  heard  that  I 
was  made  a  defendant  till  now;  nor  do  I  know  anything  of 
the  cause,  but  that  in  the  High  Commission  I  gave  my  vote 
according  to  my  conscience,  and  law  too,  for  aught  I  know, 
and  must  refer  myself  to  the  acts  of  that3  court.  On  Wed- 

Decemb.     nesday,  Decemb.  13,  I  petitioned  for  counsel  in  this  cause, 

Decemb.  and  had  the  same  assigned  me;  and  on  the  18th  day  I 
appeared  according  to  my  summons,  but  I  was  not  called  in, 
and  the  business  put  off  to  that  day  three  weeks. 

Decemb.  On  Thursday,  Decemb.  28,  which  was  Innocents'  Day, 
one  Mr.  Wells,  a  New-England  minister,  came  to  me,  and  in 
a  boisterous  manner  demanded  to  know  whether  I  had 
repented  or  not.  I  knew  him  not,  till  he  told  me  he  was 
suspended  by  me  when  I  was  Bishop  of  London,  and  he  then 
a  minister  in  Essex.  I  told  him,  if  he  were  suspended,  it  214 
was  doubtless  according  to  law.  Then  upon  a  little  further 
speech,  I  recalled  the  man  to  my  remembrance,  and  what 
care  I  took  in  conference  with  him  at  London-House,  to  recall 
him  from  some  of  his  turbulent  ways,  but  all  in  vain ;  and  now 
he  inferred  out  of  the  good  words  I  then  gave  him,  that  I 
suspended  him  against  my  conscience.  In  conclusion  he  told 
me,  I  went  about  to  bring  Popery  into  the  kingdom,  and  he 
hoped  I  should  have  my  reward  for  it.  When  I  ^aw  him  at 

1  ['  Not  long  ...  I  am.'  inserted  afterwards,  the  greater  part  on  oppo 
site  page.] 

2  ['  had  been  called  upon  '  originally  written  '  hath  been  formerly  called 
upon']  3  ['that' interlined.] 

q  [Peter  Smart,  one  of  the  Preben-  at  London.     On  the  change  of  affairs, 

daries    of    Durham,    had,    in    1628,  Smart  preferred  a  Bill  of  Complaint 

preached  a  seditious  sermon  in  that  against  Cosin  and  the  other  parties, 

cathedral ;  for  which,  at  the  instiga-  The  Articles  against  Cosin  are  to  be 

tion  of  Cosin  and  others,  he  was  ques-  found  in  Nalson's  Collection,  vol.  i. 

tioned,  first  at  Durham,  and   after-  pp.  789,  790;   and  Cosin's  Reply  in 

wards  in  the  High  Commission  Court  Hcylin's  Examen  Historicum,  p.  284.] 



this  height,  I  told  him,  he  and  his  fellows,  what  by  their 
ignorance,  and  what  by  their  railing,  and  other  boisterous 
carriage,  would  soon  actually  make  more  Papists  by  far  than 
ever  I  intended ;  and  that  I  was  a  better  Protestant  than  he, 
or  any  of  his  followers.  So  I  left  him  in  his  heat.  This 
man  was  brought  to  my  chamber  by  Mr.  Isaac  Pennington, 
son  to  the  lieutenant. 

By  this  time  something  was  made  ready  again  in  my  great 
business ;  and  Wednesday  at  night,  Janua.  3,  I  received  an  Janua.  3, 
order  for  my  appearance,  to  answer1  to  the  impeachment 164^ 
against  me;  on  the  Monday  following,  Janua.  8 r.  This  summons 
seemed  sudden,  after  so  great  an  intermission ;  yet  I  could 
not  petition  for  more  time  till  Saturday,  Janua.  6;  because,  Janua.  6. 
as  the  messenger  told  me,  the  House  sat  not  again  till  then. 
Then  I  petitioned  for  more  time,  in  regard  my  counsel  were 
not  in  town2 ;   and  I  had  time  given  till  Tuesday,  Janua.  16, 
and  that  day  set  peremptorily8.     Notwithstanding  the  short- 

1  [Originally  written  '  to  appear,  and  to  answer '] 

2  ['  in  town  ; '  orig.  '  at  home  ;'] 

r  See  the  order,  apud  Eushw.  p.  823  ; 
Pryn,  p.  43. 

["Die  Mercurii,  3  Jan.  1643.  It  is 
this  day  ordered  by  the  Lords  in  Par 
liament,  That  this  House  will  proceed 
against  William  Laud,  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  upon  the  impeachment 
brought  up  from  the  House  of  Com 
mons  for  high  cririies  and  misde 
meanours,  on  Thursday  morning  next, 
at  ten  of  the  clock,  being  the  eighth 
of  this  instant  January,  1643.  At  which 
time  the  said  Archbishop  is  to  prepare 
himself  for  his  defence. 

"  To  the  Gentleman  Usher  attending 
this  Hou«e,  or  his  deputy,  to  be  de 
livered  to  the  Lieutenant  of  the  Tower, 
or  his  deputy,  for  the  Archbishop."] 

s  The  petition  may  be  found  apud 
Rushw.  p.  823,  and  the  order  of  the 
Lords,  p.  824.  Both  apud  Pryn,  p.  44. 
["To  the  Right  Honourable  the  Lords 

assembled   in  the   High   Court  of 


"  The  humble  petition  of  William 

Laud,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 

prisoner  in  the  Tower, 
"  Humbly  sheweth, 

"That  your  petitioner,  having  re 
ceived  your  Lordships'  command,  by 
your  honourable  order  of  the  third  of 
this  instant  January  annexed,  to  at 
tend  and  answer  the  impeachments 

against  your  petitioner  from  the 
honourable  House  of  Commons,  on 
Monday  the  eighth  of  this  instant 
January,  which  is  but  five  days'  dis 
tance,  and  at  a  time  when  two  of  his 
three  counsel  assigned  are  out  of  town, 
and  your  petitioner's  witnesses,  re 
siding  in  several  remote  places,  cannot 
be  summoned  in  so  short  a  time,  nor 
willing  haply  to  come  upon  their 
summons,  without  warrant  from  your 
Lordships;  Your  petitioner's  most 
humble  suit  to  your  Lordships  is,  That 
you  will  honourably  vouchsafe  him 
some  more  convenient  time,  to  send 
for  his  counsel  and  witnesses  to  testify 
in  the  matters  of  fact  charged  against 
him ;  and  withal  to  grant  the  petitioner 
your  honourable  order,  to  command 
the  witnesses  summoned  to  attend  at 
the  time  by  your  Lordships  to  be  ap 
pointed  ;  which  his  humble  request 
your  petitioner  had  sooner  presented 
to  your  Lordships,  but  that  no  sitting 
hath  been  (as  your  petitioner  is  in 
formed)  until  this  day,  sithence  your 
honourable  order  in  this  behalf  made 
known  to  him. 

"  And  your  petitioner  shall  pray,  &c. 
"  W.  Cant." 

Upon  reading  whereof,  the  Lords 
made  this  order  : — 

"  Sabbati,  6  Jan.  1643.  Whereas  the 


ness  of  this  time,  my  counsel  being  out  of  town,  as  not 
Janua.  7.  expecting  it,  I  was  on  Sunday,  Janua.  7,  ordered  again  to 
appear  in  Mr.  Smart's  suit,  the  next  day.  The  warrant  bare 
date  a  fortnight  before  ;  yet  partly  to  sanctify  the  Sabbath*, 
and  partly  to  show  his  great  civility  to  me  in  giving  me 
warning,  I  was  not  served  with  it  till  Sunday  night  at  seven 
Janua.  8.  of  the  clock.  The  next  morning,  I  went  to  Westminster  as 
I  was  commanded ;  but  I  was  sent  back,  and  not  so  much  as 
called  upon.  So,  beside  the  charge  I  was  at,  that  day  was 
lost  and  taken  from  me  and  my  business,  as  short  time  as  I 
had  given  me. 

Janua.  16.  Then  Tuesday  came  on,  Januar.  16.  And  whereas  I  was 
ordered  to  appear  at  the  Lords'  House  at  nine  in  the  morning, 
I  was  by  another  order  put  off  to  one  of  the  clock  in  the 
afternoon  u.  Then  I  appeared  x.  The  Committee  that  were 
to  press  the  evidence  against  me  began  to  proceed  upon  the 
former  general*  Articles,  as  well  as  upon  the  latter  y.  But  to 

House  formerly  appointed  Monday, 
being  the  eighth  of  this  instant  Janu 
ary,  1643,  to  proceed  against  William 
Laud,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  upon 
the  impeachment  brought  up  against 
him  from  the  House  of  Commons  for 
high  treasons,  and  high  crimes  and 
misdemeanours  ;  upon  reading  the  pe 
tition  of  the  said  Archbishop,  it  is  this 
day  ordered  by  the  Lords  in  Parlia 
ment,  to  the  end  the  counsel  and  wit 
nesses  of  the  said  Archbishop  may  have 
competent  time  to  attend  the  hearing 
of  the  cause,  that  this  House  will 
icspite  the  proceedings  against  the 
said  Archbishop  upon  the  said  im 
peachments  until  Tuesday,  the  16th  of 
this  instant  January,  1643,  at  ten  of 
the  clock  in  the  morning ;  at  which 
time  the  said  Archbishop  is  peremp 
torily  appointed  to  provide  his  wit 
nesses,  and  prepare  his  defence  unto 
the  said  impeachments. 

"  To  the  Gentleman  Usher,  &c."] 

*  For  so  those  Puritans  styled  and 
accounted  the  Sunday. — H.  W. 

u  Vide  the  order,  apud  Rushw.  p. 
824;  Pryn,  p.  45. 

["Die  Lunge,  15  Jan.  1643.  It  is 
this  day  ordered  by  the  Lords  in  Par 
liament,  That  the  Lieutenant  of  the 
Tower  of  London,  or  his  deputy,  shall 
bring  in  safety  the  Archbishop  of  Can 
terbury  before  their  Lordships,  on 
Tuesday,  the  16th  of  this  instant  Janu 
ary,  by  one  of  the  clock  in  the  after 

noon.  At  which  time  this  House  will 
proceed  against  the  said  Archbishop, 
upon  the  impeachments  brought  up 
from  the  House  of  Commons  for  high 
treason,  and  high  crimes  and  mis 
demeanours  :  and  this  to  be  a  sufficient 
warrant  in  that  behalf. 

"  To  the  Gentleman  Usher,  &c."] 

x  ["  About  three  o'clock  that  after 
noon  the  Lords  sent  down  this  message 
to  the  House  of  Commons : 

"  A  message  from  the  Lords  by  Sir 
Robert  Rich  and  Mr.  Page,  to  acquaint 
the  House  that  they  are  ready  to 
hear  the  charge  upon  the  impeach 
ment  against  the  Bishop  of  Canter 

"  Upon  this  message,  the  Committee 
of  the  House  of  Commons  appointed 
to  manage  the  evidence  against  him, 
went  up  to  the  Lords'  House  :  and 
then  the  Archbishop,  being  brought  to 
the  bar,  after  he  had  there  kneeled  a 
little  space,  was  commanded  to  stand." 

Prynne,  in  recording  the  further 
proceedings  of  this  day,  mentions  that 
both  sets  of  Articles  were  read,  but 
only  the  Archbishop's  reply  to  the 
latter  set,  ascribing  the  Archbishop's 
silence  respecting  the  first  set  of  Arti 
cles  to  his  own  sense  of  guilt,  and  not 
to  the  circumstance  mentioned  in  the 
text.  Maynard  also  urged  the  same 
argument  at  the  time.] 

y  Mr.  Maynard  was  then  chief  mana 
ger  for  the  Commons.  See  his  speech 



the  first  Articles  I  had  never  been  called  to  answer,  nor 
(99)  ever  joined  issue.  Upon  this,  there  was  much  looking 
one  upon  another,  as  if  they  meant  to  ask  where  the  failure 
was :  but  by  this  means  there  could  not  then  be  any  pro 
ceeding.  So  I  was  there  peremptorily  ordered  to  put  in  my 
answer  on  Monday,  Janua.  22,  both  to  the  original  and  to 
the  additional  Articles,  and  in  writing2. 

At  this  day  and  time  I  appeared,  as  I  was  ordered  to  do ;  Jan.  22, 

1  r  A  4 

but  could  not  obtain  of  the  Lords,  either  to  take  my  former 
answer  off  from  the  file,  if  I  must  put  in  another;  nor  to 
distinguish  the  Articles,  which  were  treason  and  which  mis 
demeanour  ;  nor  leave  for  my  counsel  to  speak  to  the  gene- 
215  rality  and  uncertainty  of  the  original  Articles,  which,  they 
professed  were  such,  as  no  man  living  could  prepare  answer 
fora.  But  I  must  put  in  my  answer  presently,  or  be  taken 

made  then  to  the. Lords,  apud  Eushw. 
p.  824,  and  Pryn,  p.  45. 

z  See  the  order,  apud  Rushw.  p.  825 ; 
Pryn,  pp.  46,  47. 

["  It  is  this  day  ordered  by  the 
Lords  in  Parliament,  That  William, 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  shall  put  in 
his  answer  in  writing  into  this  House 
to  the  first  and  further  Articles  of  Im 
peachment  brought  up  from  the  House 
of  Commons  against  him,  by  Monday 
morning  next  peremptorily,  and  that 
the  same  counsel  formerly  assigned 
shall  be  of  counsel  with  him." 

On  the  next  Saturday  was  issued 
the  following  order  : — 

Die  Sabbati,  20  Jan.  1643.  It  is 
this  day  ordered  by  the  Lords  in  Par 
liament,  That  the  Lieutenant  of  the 
Tower  of  London,  or  his  deputy,  shall 
bring  in  safety  William,  Archbishop 
of  Cant.,  before  their  Lordships,  on 
Monday,  the  22d  of  this  instant  Janu 
ary,  by  ten  of  the  clock  in  the  morning, 
to  put  in  his  answer  to  the  Articles  of 
Impeachment  brought  up  from  the 
House  of  Commons  against  him,  ac 
cording  to  the  former  order  of  this 
House,  of  the  16th  of  this  instant 

"  To  the  Gentleman  Usher,  &c."] 

a  See  the  Archbishop's  petition  made 
herein,  Jan.  19,  apud  Rushw.  p.  825, 
Pryn,  p.  46. 
["  To  the  Right  Honourable  the  Lords 

assembled  in  Parliament, 
"  The  humble  petition  of  William, 

Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  prisoner 

in  the  Tower, 

"  Sheweth, 

"  That  whereas  your  petitioner,  hav 
ing  formerly  answered  the  particular 
Articles  exhibited  against  him  by  the 
honourable  House  of  Commons,  and 
now  by  your  Lordships'  order  of  the 
16th  of  this  instant  is  commanded  to 
put  in  his  answer  to  the  first  and 
further  Articles  of  Impeachment 
brought  up  against  him,  by  Monday 
morning  next,  for  doing  whereof  his 
former  counsel  is  assigned  him  : 

"  That  your  petitioner,  having  ad 
vised  with  his  counsel  concerning  the 
first  Articles,  which  were  exhibited 
now  almost  three  years  sithence,  find 
ing  upon  perusal  and  debate  of  the 
same  that  the  said  former  Articles 
are  such,  that  no  answer  can  be 
made  thereunto,  nor  your  petitioner 
in  any  wise  enabled  to  prepare  for 
his  defence  to  the  same,  as  they  now 
stand : 

"  That  forasmuch  as  the  said  Articles 
of  Impeachment  import  no  less  than 
a  charge  of  high  treason,  and  foras 
much  as  your  petitioner  is  by  his 
counsel  informed,  that  especially  in 
cases  of  life,  the  defendant  is  allowed 
to  offer  to  the  Court,  where  the  same 
depends,  his  exceptions  by  his  counsel, 
before  any  plea  pleaded  : 

"  Your  petitioner  most  humbly  be- 
seecheth  your  Lordships  to  appoint  a 
day  for  the  hearing  of  your  petitioner's 
counsel  concerning  the  same. 

"  And  vour  petitioner  shall  pray,  &c. 
«  W.  Cant."] 


pro  confesso^.    So  in  these  straits  I  put  in  my  answer  to  both 
Articles ;  which  follows  in  h&c  verba : — 

"  The  humble  answer  of  William,  Archbishop  of  Canter 
bury,  to  the  first  and  further  Articles  of  Impeachment  brought 
up  by  the  Honourable  House  of  Commons  against  him,  and 
by  order  of  the  Right  Honourable  the  Lords  in  Parliament, 
of  the  16th  of  this  instant,  directed  to  be  put  in. 

"  As  to  the  13th  Article  of  the  said  first  Articles,  and  the 
matters  therein  charged,  and  all  matters  or  things  in  the 
same  or  any  of  the  rest  of  the  said  Articles  contained,  which 
concern  any  act  of  hostility,  whether  between  the  King  and 
his  subjects,  or  between  subject  and  subject,  or  which  may 
be  conceived  to  arise  upon  the  coming  of  any  English  army 
against  Scotland,  or  the  coming  of  the  Scottish  army  into 
England;  or  upon  any  action,  attempt,  assistance,  counsel, 
or  device,  having  relation  thereunto,  and  falling  out  by  the 
occasion  of  the  late  troubles,  preceding  the  late  conclusion  of 
the  treaty,  and  return  of  the  Scottish  army  into  Scotland  :  this 
defendant  saith ;  That  it  is  enacted  by  an  Act  made  during 
the  sitting  of  this  present  Parliament,  that  the  same,  and 
whatsoever  hath  ensued  thereupon,  whether  trenching  upon 
the  laws  and  liberties  of  the  Church  and  kingdom,  or  upon 
his  Majesty's  honour  and  authority,  in  no  time  hereafter 
may  be  called  in  question,  or  resented  as  a  wrong,  national 

b  ["  Die   Lunse,    22°  die  Januarii.  the  19th  of  January.' 

This    day   being    appointed  for  the  "  Upon  this,  the  House  commanded 

Archbishop  of  Canterbury  to  put  in  him  and  his  counsel  to  withdraw, 

his   answer   to  the  first  and  further  "  And  the  House  took  this  desire  of 

Articles  of  Impeachment  brought  up  the  Bishop's  into  consideration.    And 

from  the  House  of  Commons  against  the  House  ordered,  To  adhere  to  the 

him,    the    House    commanded     the  former  orders,  and  the  Speaker  to  let 

Gentleman  Usher  of  the  Black  Rod  to  him  know,  that  this  House  expects 

bring  him  in ;  who  brought  him  to  his  answer  now  presently, 

the  Bar,  where  he  kneeled  as  a  delin-  "  The  Bishop  was  called  in ;    the 

quent,  until  he  was  bid  by  the  House  Speaker  told  him  of  the  order  of  this 

to  stand  up.  House  as  aforesaid. 

"  And  then  the  Speaker  demanded  "  Hereupon  he  humbly  desired  a 

of  him  his  answer.     The  Archbishop  little  time  to  advise  with  his  counsel 

answered  :  '  That  the  first  Articles  are  now    presently,    which    this    House 

so  full   of  generals,  there   being  no  granted."] 

certain  time,  place,  nor  fact  expressed,  c  This  answer  was  put  in  Jan.  22, 

that  his  counsel  are  not  able  to  draw,  being  short,  and  in  general  pleading 

or  advise  him  in  an  answer;  therefore  Not  guilty,  and  making  only  a  short 

he  desired  their  Lordships  would  be  particular  plea  to   the  13th  Article, 

pleased  to  hear  his  counsel  to  offer  to  The   said  answer  may  be  found   in 

this   House    some    exception,   before  Rush.  p.  826,  and  Pryn,  p.  47.  I  have 

any  plea  be  pleaded,  according  to  the  transcribed  it  from  Pryn,  and  caused 

desire  of  his  petition  to  this  House,  it  to  be  here  inserted. — H.  W. 


or  personal ;  and  that  no  mention  be  made  thereof  in  time 
coming,  neither  in  judgment  nor  out  of  judgment ;  but  that 
it  be  held  and  reputed,  as  though  never  such  things  had  been 
thought  or  wrought ;  as  by  the  said  Act  may  more  at  large 
appear  d :  with  this,  That  this  defendant  doth  aver,  that  he  is 
none  of  the  persons  excepted  by  the  said  Act,  or  the  said 
offences  charged  upon  this  defendant  any  of  the  offences 
excepted  by  the  said  Act. 

"  And  as  to  all  the  rest  of  the  said  first  and  further  Articles, 
this  defendant,  saving  to  himself  all  advantages  of  exception 
to  the  said  Articles,  humbly  saith,  He  is  not  guilty  of  all  or 
any  the  matters  by  the  said  Articles  charged,  in  such  manner 
and  form  as  the  same  are  by  the  said  Articles  charged 
against  him  e." 

This  day  the  Thames  was  so  full  of  ice  that  I  could  not 
go  by  water.  It  was  frost  and  snow,  and  a  most  bitter  day. 
I  went  therefore  with  the  Lieutenant  in  his  coach,  and  twelve 
warders  with  halberts  went  all  along  the  streets.  I  could  not 
obtain  either  the  sending  of  them  before,  or  the  suffering 
them  to  come  behind,  but  with  the  coach  they  must  come ; 
which  was  as  good  as  to  call  the  people  about  me.  So  from 
the  Tower-gate  to  Westminster  I  was  sufficiently  railed  on 

d  [16  Car.  I.   cap.  xvii.     See  also  Cant.,  to  the  first  and  further  Articles 

Kymer,  Foed.  IX.  iii.  73.]  of  Impeachment  brought  up  by  this 

e  [It  is  further  added  in  the  Lords'  House  against  him,  which  was  read, 

Journals  : —  and   ordered    to   be   referred   to   the 

"The  Bishop,   after  this,   desired,  Committee  appointed  to  manage  the 

'That  his  former  answer  maybe  re-  evidence  against  the    Archbishop  of 

turned  unto  him  again,  that  so  there  Canterbury,  and  accordingly  delivered 

may  be  but  one  answer  to  one  and  the  to  Sergeant  Wilde." 

same  charge.'     And  further,   he  de-  After  this,  the  House  of  Commons 

sired,    'That  his   counsel,  in   conve-  made  the  two  following  orders  :— 

nient  time,  might  be  heard  in  matter  "  Feb.  22,  1643.    Ordered,  That  the 

of  law.'  Committee  appointed  to  manage  the 

"  The  Bishop  being  withdrawn,  the  evidence  at  the  trial  of  the  Archbishop 

House    gave    no    order    herein,   but  of  Canterbury  do  peremptorily  meet 

ordered,    That   a   copy  of  the  Arch-  this  afternoon,  at  three  of  the  clock, 

bishop's  answer,  made  this  day,  should  in  the  Court  of  Wards,  upon  the  dis- 

be  written,   and   attested   under  the  tributionof  the  parts  of  the  evidence." 

hand  of  the  Clerk  of  the  Parliament,  "4  Martii,  1643.     A  message  to  be 

and    sent    down    to    the    House    of  sent  to  the  Lords,  to  desire  them  to 

Commons."  appoint  a  day  for  the  trial  of  the  Arch- 

The   answer  was   accordingly   sent  bishopof  Canterbury.  Master  Sergeant 

down  to  the  Lower  House,  as  appears  Wilde  went  up  to  the  Lords  to  appoint 

by  the  following  entry  in  the  Com-  a  day  for  the  trial  of  the  Archbishop 

inons'  Journals  : —  of  Canterbury.  Sergeant  Wilde  brings 

"  Jan   22,  1 643.     The  Lords,  by  Sir  answer,  That  the  Lords  have  appointed 

llobert  Uich  and  Mr.  Page,  sent  down  to-morrow  sevennight  for  the  trial  of 

the  answer  of  William,  Archbishop  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury."] 


and  reviled  all  the  way.     God  of  His  mercy  forgive  the  mis 
guided  people  !     My  answer  being  put  in,  I  was  for  that  time 
dismissed ;  and  the  tide  serving  me,  I  made  a  hard  shift  to  210 
return  by  water. 

And  now,  notwithstanding  all  this  haste  made  to  have  my 
answer  in,  Mr.  Pryn  cannot  make  this  broken  business  ready ' 
against  me.  Therefore,  to  fill  up  some  time,  I  was2  ordered 

Janua.  29.  to  be  at  the  House  again  on3  Monday,  Janua.  29,  about 
Mr.  Smart's  business.  But  being  put  to  this  trouble  and 
charge,  and  showed  to  the  people  for  a  further  scorn,  I  was 
sent  back  again,  and  had  nothing  said 4  to  me. 

All  February  passed  over,  and  Mr.  Pryn  not  yet  ready ;  he 
had  not  yet  sufficiently  prepared  his  witnesses.  But  on 

Mar.  4.  Monday,  Mar.  4,  an  order  passed  to  call  me  to  the  House,  to 
answer  my  charge  of  high  treason,  on  Tuesday,  March  12, 

Mar.  9.  following f.  And  on  Saturday,  March  9,  I  received  a  note 
from  the  Committee  which  were  to  press  the  evidence  against 
me,  what  Articles  they  meant  to  begin  with  ;  which  had  a 
show  of  some  fair  respect ;  but  the  generality  and  uncer 
tainty  of  the  Articles  was  such,  as  rendered  it  a  bare  show 
only  ;  no  particular  being  charged  concerning  which  I  might 
provide  for  any  witnesses  or  counter-proof  g. 

'ready'  interlined.] 

on  Monday,  Janua.  29,'  here  originally  inserted.] 

'  on  '  interlined.]  4  ['  said  '  originally  written  '  sent'] 

f  See  the  order,  apud  Rushw.  p.  827 ;  bury,  desiring  that  Sir  Henry  Mildmay 

Pryn,  p.  48.  may  be  examined  as  a  witness  in  his 

["Die  Lunse,  4  Martii,  1643.  Or-  business,  he  being  to  come  to  trial  on 
dered,  That  the  Archbishop  of  Canter-  Tuesday  next,  was  this  day  read.  And 
bury  shall  appear  before  their  Lord-  it  is  ordered,  according  to  his  petition, 
ships  on  Tuesday,  the  12th  of  this  That  he  shall  be  examined  as  a  witness 
instant  March,  at  nine  of  the  clock  in  at  the  trial  of  the  said  Bishop  according- 
thc  morning.  At  which  time  this  ly.  It  was  likewise  then  ordered,  That 
House  will  proceed  against  the  Arch-  divers  members  of  the  House  of  Com- 
bishop  upon  the  first  and  further  mons  shall  be  examined  as  witnesses 
Articles  of  Impeachment  brought  up  against  him;  and  that  the  Lords  be 
from  the  House  of  Commons  against  moved  by  Sergeant  Wilde,  that  some 
him  for  high  treason,  and  high  crimes  members  and  attendants  of  the  Lords' 
and  misdemeanours,  whereof  the  said  House  be  examined  at  the  Arch- 
Archbishop  is  hereby  to  take  notice,  bishop's  trial.  And  that  it  be  referred 
and  provide  himself  accordingly."]  to  the  Committee  of  Sequestrations  to 

s  [There  was  read  in  the  House  of  consider  of  some  convenient  recom- 
Commons,  on  March  9,  a  petition  pense  for  such  clerks,  solicitors,  and 
from  the  Archbishop  that  Sir  Henry  others  as  have  been,  or  shall  be,  em- 
Mildmay  might  be  examined  as  a  ployed  in  the  transcribing  of  breviates, 
witness  on  his  trial ;  upon  which  the  and  other  services  done  by  the  Corn- 
following  order  was  made  :—  mittee  for  the  Bisbop  of  Canterbury 

"  9  Martii,  1643.   The  humble  peti-  his  trial."] 
tion  of  William,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 



AND  now  being  ready  to  enter  upon  the  hearing  and  the 
trial  itself,  I  hold  it  necessary  for  me  to  acquaint  the  reader 
with  some  general  things  before  that  begin ;  partly  to  the 
end1  he  may  see  the  course  of  this  trial,  and  the  carriage 
which  hath  been  in  it2;  and  partly  to  avoid  the  often  and 
tedious  repetition,  which  else  must  necessarily  be  of  some  of 
them ;  and  especially  that  they  may  not  be  mingled,  either 
with  the  evidence,  or  my  answers  to  it,  to  interrupt  the 
current,  or  make  anything  more  obscure. 

(100)  1.  The  Committee  appointed  by  the  House  of  Com 
mons  to  manage  and  press  the  evidence  against  me,  were 
Sergeant  Wilde a,  Mr.  Browne13,  Mr.  Maynardc,  Mr.  Nicolasd, 
Mr.  Hill e;  but  none  spake  at  the  bar  but  the  first  four: 
Mr.  Hill  was  Consul-Bibulus  f ;  Mr.  Pryn  was  trusted  with 
the  providing  of  all  the  evidence,  and  was  relater,  and 
prompter,  and  all,  never  weary  of  anything,  so  he  might  do 
me  mischief.  And  I  conceive  in  future  times  it  will  not  be 
the  greatest  honour  to  these  proceedings,  that  he,  a  man 
twice  censured  in  the  High  Court  of  Star-Chamber,  set  in 
the  pillory  twice — once3  for  libelling  the  Queen's  Majesty, 
and  other  ladies  of  great  honour,  and  again  for  libelling  the 
Church,  and  the  government  and  governors  of  it,  the  Bps. — 
and  that  had  his  ears  there  cropped,  should  now  be  thought 
the  only  fit  and  indifferent  man  to  be  trusted  with  the 

1  ['  partly  to  the  end '  originally  written  '  partly  because '] 

2  ['  and  the  carriage  .  .  .  it ;'  in  marg.  ]  3  ['  once '  in  marg.] 

a  [John  Wilde,  M.P.  for  Worcester-  Seal,   and    died,    Oct.  9,    1690,   well 

shire.]  spoken  of,  as  a  sound  lawyer.] 

b  [Samuel  Browne,    an   M.P.     He  d  [Robert  Nicholas,  M.P.  for  Devizes. 

was  afterwards  one  of   the  Commis-  Afterwards  Sergeant-at-Law,  and  one 

sioners  of    the  Great  Seal,  and   one  of  the  Judges  of  the  Court  of  King's 

of  the  Judges  of  the  Court  of  King's  Bench.] 

Bench.]  e  [Robert  Hill,  M.P.  for  Bridport. 

c  [John  Maynard,  M.P.  for  Totnes.  Afterwards  one  of  the  Barons  of  the 

He     lived     through     the    reigns    of  Exchequer.] 

Charles  II.  and  James  II.,  and  took  an  f  [Referring  to  M.  Calpurnius  Bibu- 

active  part  in  bringing  over  William  lus,  Caesar's  inactive  colleague  in  his 

III.     In  1689,  he  was  appointed  one  first  consulship.] 
o    the  Commissioners  of  the    Great 


witnesses  and  the  evidence  against  me,  an  archbishop,  and 
sitting  at  his  censure1. 

2.  Mr.  Pryn  took  to  him  two  young  men,  to  help  to  turn 
his  papers,  and  assist  him ;  Mr.  Grice,  and  Mr.  Beck.     Mr. 
Grice  was  son  to  Mr.  Tho.  Grice,  Fellow2  of  St.  John  Bap. 
College  in  my  time,  and  after  beneficed  near   Stanes°'.      I 
know  not  what  the  matter  was,  but  I  could  never  get  his  217 
love.     But  he  is  deadh,  and  so  let  him  rest3.     And  now  his 
son  succeeds,  and  it  seems  he  inherits  his  father's  disposition 
towards  me ;  for  I  hear  his  tongue  walks  liberally  over  me 

in  all  places4.  For  Mr.  Beck,  he  hath  received  some  courtesy 
from  me,  and  needed  not  in  this  kind  to  have  expressed  his 
thankfulness.  But  I  leave  them  both  to  do  the  office  which 
they  have  undertaken,  and  to  grow  up  under  the  shadow  of 
Mr.  Pryn;  God  knows  to  what. 

3.  It  was  told  me  by  a  man  of  good  credit,  that  was  present 
and  heard  it,  that  my  name  coming  in  question  among  some 
gentlemen,  after  divers  had  spoken  their  thoughts  of  me,  and 
not  all  one  way,  a  Parliament-man  being  there,  was  pleased 
to  say,  that  I  was  now  an  old  man,  and  it  would  be  happy 
both  for  me  and  the  Parliament,  that  God  would  be  pleased 
to  take  me  away :  and  yet  I  make  no  doubt,  but  that  if  age, 
or  grief,  or  faintness  of  spirit  had  ended  my  days,  many  of 
them  would  have  done  as  Tiberius  did  in  the  case  of  Asinius 
Gallus ;  that  is,  Incus arent  casus,  qui  reum  abstulissent,  ante- 
quam  cor  am  convinceretur  l :    They  would   cryk  out    against 
this  hard  chance,  that  should  take  away  so  guilty  a  person 
from  public  trial,  when  they  were  even  ready  for  it.     After 
this,  when  a  friend  of  mine  bemoaned  my  case  to  another 

1  ['  an  archbishop  .  .  .  censure.'  inserted  afterwards,  part  on  opp.  page.] 

2  ['  Fellow '  originally  written  '  sometimes  Fellow '] 

3  ['  But  he  ...  rest.'  in  marg.]  *  ['  in  all  places.'  on  opp.  page.] 

«  [Thomas  Grice  was  elected  to  S.  numb.  943,  pp.  55  seq.)] 

John's  College  in  1605,  from  Merch.  b  [Grice  had  died  prior  to  Aug.  9, 

Tailors'  School  (see  Wilson's  Hist,  of  1637,  when  his  successor  was  appointed 

Merch,  Tailors'  School,  p.  1191) ;  and-,  (Newcourt,  Eepert.  vol.  i.  p.  689).] 

July  1,  1617,  was  admitted  Rector  of  !  "  Scilicet  (plus  quam)  mcdio  tri- 

hitlington,     Middlesex      (Newcourt,  enniodefuittempussubeundijudicium 

Repert.  vol.  i.  p.  689).      Archbishop  consular!  seni." — Tacit.  Annal.  lib.  6. 

Sancroft  remarks  on    this  •  passage  :  [cap.  23.     This  note  is  a  continuation 

'  Of  Mr.  Thomas  Grice,  see  the  papers  of  the  passage  quoted  in  the  text.] 

concerning  the  Mastership  of  S.  John  k  '  have  cried ' 
Baptist  College.'     (See  Lamb.  MSS. 


Parliament-man  (of  whom  I  had  deserved  very  well)  and  said, 
he  knew  I  was  a  good  man  :  the  Parliament-man  replied, 
'  Be  he  never  so  good,  we  must  now  make  him  ill  for  our 
own  sakes.'  What  the  meaning  of  these  speeches  is,  let 
understanding  men  judge.  And  even  during  my  trial,  some 
citizens  of  London  were  heard  to  say,  that  indeed  I  answered 
many  things  very  well :  but  yet  I  must  suffer  somewhat  for 
the  '  honour  of  the  House/ 

4.  So  all  my  hopes  now,  under  God,  lay  wholly  on  the 
honour  and  justice  of  the  Lords.  Yet  seeing  how  fierce  many 
of  the  people  were  against  me,  and  how  they  had  clamoured 
in  other  cases,  and  that  Mr.  Pryn  was  set  up  at  once  to 
mischief  and  to  scorn  me,  and  foreseeing  how  full  of  reproaches 
my  trial  was  like  to  be ;  I  had  a  strong  temptation  in  me, 
rather  to  desert  my  defence,  and  put  myself  into  the  hands 
of  God's  mercy,  than  endure  them.     But  when  I  considered 
what  offence  I  should  commit  thereby  l  against  the  course  of 
justice,  that  that  might  not  proceed  in  the   ordinary  way ; 
what  offence  against  my  own  innocency  and  my  good  name, 
which  I  was  bound  both  in  nature  and  conscience  to  maintain 
by  all  good  means,  which  by  deserting  my  cause  could  not 
be ;  but  especially,  what  offence  against  God,  as  if  He  were 
not  able  to  protect  me,  or  not  willing,  in  case  it  stood  with 
my  eternal  happiness  2,  and  His  blessed  will  of  trial  of  me  in 
the   meantime ;  I  say  when  I   considered   this,  I    humbly 
besought  God  for  strength  and   patience,    and   resolved  to 
undergo  all  scorns,  and  whatsoever  else  might  happen  to  me, 
rather  than  betray  my  innocency  to  the  malice  of  any. 

5.  And  though  my  hopes  under  God  were  upon  the  Lords, 
yet  when  my  trial  came  on,  it  did  somewhat  trouble  me,  to 
see  so  few  Lords  in  that  great  House.     For  at  the  greatest 
presence  that  was  any  day  of  my  hearing,  there  were  not 

218  above  fourteen,  and  usually  not  above  eleven  or  twelve.  Of 
these,  one-third  part  at  least,  each  day  took,  or  had  occasion 
to  be  gone,  before  the  charge  of  the  day  was  half  given.  I 
never  had  any  one  day  the  same  Lords  all  present  at  my 
defence  in  the  afternoon,  that  were  at  my  charge  in  the 
morning :  some  leading  Lords  scarce  present  at  my  charge, 
four  days  of  all  my  long  trial,  nor  three  at  my  defence  :  and 
1  ['thereby' interlined.]  2  [' happiness' on  opposite  page.] 

LAUD. — VOT,.  iv. 


which  is  most,  no  one  Lord  present  at  my  whole  trial,  but  the 
Right  Honourable  the  Lord  Gray  of  Wark1,  the  Speaker, 
without  whose  presence  it  could  not  be  a  House.  (101)  In 
this  case  I  stood  in  regard  of  my  honourable  judges. 

6.  When  my  hearing  came  on,  usually  my  charge  was  in 
giving  till  almost  two  of  the  clock.  Then  I  was  commanded 
to  withdraw ;  and  upon  my  humble  petition  fur  time  to 
answer,  I  had  no  more  given  me,  than  till  four  the  same 
afternoon •  scarce  time  enough  advisedly  to  peruse  the  evi 
dence  :  my  counsel  not  suffered  to  come  to  me,  till  I  had 
made  my  answer,  nor  any  friend  else,  but  my  solicitor,  Mr. 
Dell,  to  help  turn  my  papers,  and  my  warder  of  the  Tower, 
to  sit  by  to  look  to  this.  And  this  was  not  the  least  cause  *, 
why  I  was  at  first  accused  of  no  less  than  treason ;  Ne  quis 
necessariorum  juvaret  periclitantem,  majestatis  crimina  subde- 
bantur  m,  as  it  fell  out  in  Silanus  his  case,  who  had  more  guilt 
about  him  (yet  not  of  treason 2)  than  (God  be  thanked)  I 
have ;  but  was  prosecuted  with  like  malice,  as  appears  in  that 
story 3.  At  four  o*  clock  *,  or  after,  the  House  sat  again ; 
and  I  made  my  answer :  and  if  I  produced  any  witness,  he 
was  not  suffered  to  be  sworn ;  so  it  was  but  like  a  testimony 
at  large,  which  the  Lords  might  the  more  freely  believe,  or 
not  believe,  as  they  pleased.  After  my  answer,  one,  or  more 
of  the  Committee,  replied  upon  me.  By  that  time  all  was 
done,  it  was  usually  half  an  hour  past  seven.  Then  in  the  5 
heat  of  the  year  (when  it  overtook  me G)  I  was  7  presently  to 
go  by  water  to  the  Tower,  full  of  weariness,  and  with  a  shirt 
as  wet  to  my  back  with  sweat,  as  the  water  could  have  made 
it,  had  I  fallen  in :  yet  I  humbly  thank  God  for  it,  He  so 
preserved  my  health,  as  that  though  I  were  8  weary  and  faint 
the  day  after,  yet  I  never  had  so  much  as  half  an  hour's 
headache,  or  other  infirmity,  all  the  time  of  this  comfortless 
and  tedious  trial. 

'  cause,'  originally  written  '  reason/] 

'  yet .  .  .  treason '  interlined.] 

'  And  this  .  .  .  story.'  on  opposite  page.] 

'  o'  clock,'  interlined.]  5  ['  the  '  interlined.] 

'me'  interlined.] 

' I  was'  originally  written  'I  was  divers  nights'] 

"'  I  were'  originally  written  '  I  was  nev.'] 

1  [Sir  William  Grey,  created  Baron          m  Tacit.  Annal.  lib.  iii.  [cnp.  67.] 
Grey  of  Warke,  Feb.  11,  1624.] 


7.  Now  for  the  method,  which  I  shall  hold  in  this  History 
of  my  trial,  it  shall  be  this.  I  will  set  down  the  evidence 
given  on  each  day,  by  itself,  and  my  answer  to  it.  But 
whereas  all  the  evidence  was  given  together,  and  so  my  whole 
answer  after;  to  avoid  all  looking  back,  and  trouble  of  turn 
ing  leaves  to  compare  the  answer  with  the  evidence,  I  will  set 
down  each  1  particular  evidence,  and  my  answer  to  it,  and  so 
all  along,  that  the  indifferent  reader  may  without  further 
trouble  see  the  force  of  the  one,  and  the  satisfaction  given  in 
the  other,  and  how  far  every  particular  is  from  treason  2. 
And  if  1  add  any  thing  3  to  my  answers  in  any  place,  either 
it  is  because  in  the  shortness  of  time  then  given  me  to  make 
my  *  answer,  it  came  not  to  my  present 5  thoughts ;  or  if  it 
did,  yet  I  forbare  to  speak  it  with  that  sharpness ;  holding  it 
neither  fit  nor  safe  in  my  condition,  to  provoke  either  my 
accusers  or  my  judges.  And  whatsoever  is  so  added  by  me, 
in  either  of  these  respects,  the  reader  shall  find  it  thus  marked 
in  the  margent,  as  here  it  stands  in  this  n. 

219  8.  Nor  did  I  wrong  Mr.  Pryn,  where  I  say,  fthat  for  all 
the  haste  to  put  in  my  answer,  Jaiiua.  22,  he  could  not  make 
this  broken  business  so  soon  ready  against  me  :'  for  'tis  well 
known,  he  kept  a  kind  of  school  of  instruction  for  such  of  the 
witnesses  as  he  durst  trust,  that  they  might  be  sure  to  speak 
home  to  the  purpose  he  would  have  them.  And  this  an 
utter  barrister,  a  man  of  good  credit,  knows ;  who  in  the 
hearing  of  men 6  beyond  exception,  said,  '  The  Archbishop  is 
a  stranger  to  me,  but  Mr.  Pryn's  tampering  about  the  wit 
nesses  is  7  so  palpable  and  foul,  that  I  cannot  but  pity  him 
and  cry  shame  of  it.'  When  I  heard  this,  I  sent  to  this 

1  ['  each'  originally  written  'the']  -  [-'and  .  .  .  treason.'  in  marg.] 

3  ['thing' interlined.]  4  ['make  my' interlined.] 

5  ['present' interlined.] 

6  ['  hearing  of  men '  originally  written  '  hearing  of  others,  men '] 

7  ['  is '  originally  written  '  was '] 

"Note,  that  where  entire  set  speeches  recapitulation   of  his  answer,  or  iii- 

were  made  by  the  Archbishop,  although  serted  in  writing  the  History. — PI.W. 

spoken  by  him  at  the  Bar,  the  same  [The  Archbishop  had  here  inserted  in- 

marks  are  put  to  it.    But  wheresoever  verted  commas   (")    in  the   margin, 

those  marks  are  found  in  the  History,  These  will  be  retained  at  the  beginning 

from  the  second  to  the  last  day  of  the  and  end  of  the  '  set  speeches,'  and  of 

trial    inclusive,  the   words  to   which  the  additions  made  by  the  Archbishop, 

they  are  affixed  were  not  spoken  at  the  and  not  all  through  them   as  origU 

Bar  at  that  time,  but  either  added  nally  printed.] 
afterwards  by  the  Archbi  hop  at  the 


gentleman,  to  know  if  lie  tendered  my  case  so  far,  as  to 
witness  it  before  the  Lords.  The  answer  I  received  was, 
that  the  thing  was  true,  and  that  very  indignation  of  it  made 
him  speak  :  but  heartily  prayed  me,  I  would  not  produce  him 
as  a  witness ;  for  if  I  did,  the  times  were  such,  he  should  be 
utterly  undone  :  and  'tis  not  hard  to  guess  by  whom.  Upon 
this  I  consulted  some  friends ;  and  upon  regard  of  his  safety 
on  the  one  side,  and  my  own  doubt,  lest  if  forced  to  his 
undoing,  he  might  through  fear,  blanch  and  mince  the  truth, 
to  my  own  prejudice,  who  produced  him,  I  forbare  the 
business,  and  left  Mr.  Pryn  to  the  bar  of  Christ,  whose 
mercy  give  him  repentance,  and  amend  him.  But  upon  my 
Christianity0  this  story  is  truth. 

0    [This  expression  noted  by  Archbishop  Bancroft,  as  if  not  approved  of.] 


220  CAP-  XXII. 


AND  now  I  come  to  Tuesday,  March  12.,  the  day  appointed  Mar.  12, 
for  my  trial  to  begin;  and  begin  it  did.     When  I  was  come,  DicSi° 
and  settled  at  the  bar,  Sergeant  Wilde  made  a  solemn  speech 
for  introduction.     I  had  a  character  given  me  before  of  this 
gentleman,  which  I  will  forbear  to  express ;  but  in  this  speech 
of  his,  and  his  future  proceedings  with  me,  I  found  it  exactly 
true.     His  speech  my  decayed  memory  cannot  give  you  at 
large ;  but  a  skeleton  of  it  I  here  present,  according  to  such 
limnes  2,  as  my  brief  notes  then  taken  can  now  call  to  my 
memory  a. 

He  began,  and  told  the  Lords,  that  the  children,  which  I 
had  travailed  with,  were  now  come  to  the  birth ;  and  that  my 
actions  were  so  foul,  and  my  (102)  treason  so  great,  as  that 
the  like  could  not  be  read  in  any  history ;  nay  so  great,  as 
that  nullus  poeta  fingere,  no  poet  could  ever  fain  the  like : 
and  that  if  all  treason  were  lost,  and  not  to  be  found  in  any 
author  what  it  is,  it  might  be  recovered  and  found  out  in  me 
and  my  actions ;  with  divers  pieces  of  Latin  sentences  to  this 
effect.  And  though  these  high  and  loud  expressions  troubled 
me  much  at  the  present :  yet  I  could  not  but  think,  that  in  3 
this  cento  of  his  he  was  much  like  one  of  them  which  cry  up 
and  down  the  city,  '  Have  you  any  old  ends  of  gold  and 

1  [These  headings  are  in  the  margin  in  the  original  MS.] 

2  ['  limnes'  originally  written  '  lymes  of  it ']  3  ['  that  in'  in  margin.] 

a  See  a  relation  of  what  then  passed,  which  request,  on  the  showing  of  Mr. 
before  Wild  began  his  speech,  apud  Maynard,  who  argued  against  it,  was 
Rushw.  p.  827,  and  Wild's  speech  en-  refused.  The  Archbishop  then  re 
tire,  ibid.  p.  828,  &c.  and  in  Pryn's  quested  that  the  articles  which  con- 
Compl.  Hist.  p.  51,  &c.  [The  sub-  tained  matters  of  treason  might  be 
stance  of  what  passed  was  to  this  effect :  severed  from  the  rest :  which  Maynard 
The  several  Articles  of  Impeachment  opposed,  because  they  were  met  to 
were  read,  and  the  Archbishop's  an-  examine  matters  of  fact  and  not  of 
swer,  plea,  and  demurrer;  and  after-  law,  and  because  all  the  Articles  toge- 
Avards  the  Archbishop  requested  that  ther,  not  each  Article  by  itself,  made 
he  might  answer  the  charge  as  a  whole,  up  the  treason  with  which  the  Arch- 
and  not  each  day's  evidence  separately ;  bishop  was  charged.] 


DiePrimo.  After  this  he  proceeded  to  give  reasons  why  I  was  not 
sooner  proceeded  against,  having  noAv  lain  by  it  above  three 
years.  The  first  reason  he  gave,  was  the  '  distractions  of  the 
time.'  And  they  indeed  were  now  grown  great ;  but  the  dis 
tractions  which  were  now,  can  be  no  argument  why  I  was 
not  proceeded  against  at  the  beginning  of  the  Parliament l, 
when  things  were  in  some  better  quiet.  His  second  reason 
was  the  '  death  of  some  persons  V  But  this  could  be  no 
reason  at  all :  for  if  the 2  persons  he  speaks  of  were  witnesses 
against  me,  more  might  die 3,  but  the  dead  could  not  be  made 
alive  again  by  this  delay;  unless  Mr.  Sergeant  had  some 
hope,  the  resurrection  might  have  been  by  this  time,  that  so 
he  might  have  produced  them.  And  if  the  persons  \vere 
Members  of  the  House  of  Commons,  as  all  men  know  Mr. 
Pym  was  in  the  chair  for  preparation  of  my  trial ;  then  this 
is  known  too,  that  Mr.  Pym  came  up  to  the  Committee  of 
Lords  full  of  great  hopes,  to  prove  God  knows  what  against 
me.  The  persons  to  be  examined  4,  wrerc  William,  Ld.  Bp.  of 
London  c,  and  Matthew,  Ld.  Bp.  of  Ely  d,  my  very  wrorthy 
friends,  and  men  like  to  know  as  much  of  me  as  any  men. 
A  lord  then  present  told  me,  there  were  some  eighteen  or 
nineteen  Interrogatories  5,  upon  which  these  bishops  were  to 
be  examined  against  me,  concerning  my  intercourse  with 
Rome;  but  all  were  built  upon  the  first,  which  was  their 
knowledge  of  the  man  who,  it  seems,  was  thought  to  be  my  221 
chief  agent  in  that  secret.  But  both  the  bishops  denying 
upon  their  oaths,  that  they,  or  either  of  them  ever  knew  any 
such  man,  all  the  rest  of  the  interrogatories,  what  relations 
he  had  to  me,  and  the  like,  must  needs  fall  to  nothing,  as 
they  did :  and  the  lord  told  me  further,  he  never  saw  Mr. 
Pym  and  the  rest  so  c  abashed  at  anything  in  his  life.  After 
this  Mr.  Pym  (as  'tis  well  known)  gave  over  that  chair, 

1  ['  of  the  Parliament'  in  margin.]  2  ['  the '  originally  written  'those  '] 

3  ['  die/  originally  written  '  die  by  this  putting  off,'] 

4  ['  examined/  originally  written  'examined  against  me/] 

5  ['  Interrogatories/  originally  written  '  Articles/]         6  ['  so '  orig.  '  more  '] 

b  "  The  death  and  dispersion  of  our  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.] 

witnesses,   the    loss   of  some  of    our  d  [Matthew  Wren  ;  after  undergoing 

members,   who  have  been  employed  the   severest  persecutions,  he  was  re- 

and  taken  pains  in  this  business."    So  stored  in  1660  to  his  bishopric,  and 

Wild's  Speech  apud  Pryn,  p.  51.  died  in  1667.] 

'  [William  Juxon,  at  the  restoration 


despairing  to  do  that  against  me  which  was  desired.  His  Die  Primo. 
third  reason  was  a  good  large  one,  and  that  was  '  other  im 
pediments  e.}  And  that's  true,  some  impediments  there  were, 
no  doubt,  or  else  I  had  come  sooner  to  hearing.  And,  as  I 
conceive,  a  chief  impediment  was,  that  there  was  not  a  man 
whose  malice  would  make  him  diligent  enough  to  search  into 
such  a  forsaken  business,  till  Mr.  Pryn  offered  himself  to  that 
service  :  for  I  think  I  may  be  confident,  that l  that  honourable 
arid  great  House  would  not  seek  any  man  out  of  their  own 
body  for  any  such  employment 2,  had  not  suit,  some  way  or 
other,  been  made  for  it. 

After  these  reasons  given  for  the  delay  of  my  trial,  he  fell 
upon  me  again  as  foul  as  at  first ;  as,  that  I  was  the  author 
of  all  the  extravagants  in  the  Government,  and  of  all  the 
concussions  in  the  State ;  that  the  quality  of  my  person 
aggravated  my  crime ;  that  my  abilities  and  gifts  were  great, 
but  that  1  perverted  them  all;  and  that  I  was  guilty  of 
'  treason  in  the  highest  altitude  V  These  were  the  liveries 
which  he  liberally  gave  me,  but  I  had  no  mind  to  wear  them. 
And  yet  I  might  not  desire  him  to  wear  this  cloth  himself, 
considering  where  I  then  stood,  and  in  what  condition. 

This  '  treason  in  the  altitude/  he  said,  was  in  my  endeavour 
to  alter  the  religion  established  by  law,  and  to  subvert  the 
laws  themselves ;  and  that  to  effect  these  I  left  no  way  unat- 
temptcd.  For  religion,  he  told  the  Lords,  that  I  laboured  a 
reconciliation  with  Rome ;  that  I  maintained  Popish  and 
Arminian  opinions  ;  that  I  suffered  traiisubstantiation  st 
justification  by  merits,  purgatory,  and  what  not,  to  be  openly 
preached  all  over  the  kingdom ;  that  I  induced  superstitious 
ceremonies,  as  consecrations  of  churches  and  chalices,  and 
pictures  of  Christ  in  glass  windows  h ;  that  I  gave  liberty  to 
the  profanation  of  the  Lord's-day;  that  I  held  intelligence 

1  ['confident,  that'  in  margin.] 

2  ['for  any  such  employment/  on  opposite  page.] 

e  "  The    multitude   of    diversions,  tioned  in  Wild's  Speech,  apud  Pryn, 

which  we  have  had  and  have  daily."  p.  52. 
So  Wild's  Speech,  ibid.  h  The  particular  ceremonies  charged 

f  "  Treason  in  the  highest  pitch  and  with  Popery  and  superstition,  are  not 

altitude."     So  Wild's  Speech,  p.  52.  named  in  Wild's  Speech,  ibid. 

s  Traiisubstantiation  is  not  men- 

56  111STOHY   01'   THE   TROUBLES   AND   Till  A.  L 

Die  Primo.  with  cardinals  and   priests,  and  endeavoured  to  ascend  to 
papal  dignity, — offers  being  made  me  to  be  a  cardinal. 

And  for  the  laws,  he  was  altogether  as  wild  in  his  asser 
tions,  as  he  was  before  for  religion.  And  if  he  :  have  no 
more  true  sense  of  religion,  than  he 2  hath  knowledge  in  the 
la\v,  (though  it  be  his  profession,)  I  think  he  may  offer  both 
long  enough  to  sale 3 1,  before  he  find  a  chapman  for  either. 
(103)  And  here  he  told  the  Lords,  that  I  held  the  same 
method  for  this,  which  I  did  for  religion.  And  surely  that 
was  to  uphold  both,  had  the  kingdom  been  so  happy  as  to 
believe  me.  But  he  affirmed  (with  great  confidence)  •>,  that 
I  caused  sermons  to  be  preached  in  Court  to  set  the  King's 
prerogative  above  the  law,  and  books  to  be  printed  to  the 
same  effect ;  that  my  actions  were  according  to  these.  Then 
he  fell  upon  the  Canons,  and  discharged  them  upon  me. 
Then,  that  I  might  be  guilty  enough,  (if  his  bare  word  could  222 
make  me  so,)  he  charged  upon  me  the  benevolence,  the  loan, 
the  ship-money,  the  illegal  pulling  down  of  buildings,  inclo- 
sures ;  saying,  that  as  Antichrist  sets  himself  above  all  that 
is  called  God,  so  I  laboured  to  set  the  King  above  all  that  is 
called  law.  And  after  a  tedious  stir,  he  concluded  his  speech 
with  this,  That  I  was  like  Naaman  the  Syrian,  a  great 
person  (he  confessed),  but  a  leper.  So  ended  this  noble 
Celeustes 4  *. 

I  was  much  troubled  to  see  myself  in  such  an  honourable 
assembly  made  so  vile.  Yet,  seeing  all  men's  eyes  upon  me, 
I  recollected  myself,  and  humbly  desired  of  the  Lords  two 
things  :  "  One,  that  they  would  expect  proof,  before  they 5 
give  up  their  belief  to  these  loud  but  loose  assertions ;  espe 
cially,  since  it  is  an  easy  thing  for  men,  so  resolved,  to 
conviciate,  instead  of  accusing ;  when  as  the  rule  given  by 
Optatus  holds  firm,  Quum  intenditur  crimen^,  when  a  crime 
is  objected,  (especially  so  high  a  crime  as  this  charged  on 

'  if  he '  originally  '  he ']  2  [ '  he '  interlined.] 

'  to  sale,'  in  marg.] 

'  this  noble  Celeustes.'  originally  '  this  Celeustes.'] 
'they'  interlined.] 

'  [These  two  expressions  are  noted  Speech,   apud  Pryn;   but  only  some 

by  Archbishop  Bancroft.]  general  invectives  and  accusations  to 

J   None   of  the  particulars,  which  this  purpose. — H.  \V. 

follow  to  the  end,  (save  the  conclusive  k   Optat.    lib.  vi.    cont.    Parmeni- 

sentence,)  are  to  be  found  in  Wild's  anum,  [p  114.  Paris.  1679.] 


me,)  'tis  necessary  that  the  proof  be  manifest,  which  yet  DiePrimo. 
against  me  is  none  at  all.  The  other,  that  their  Lps.  would  l 
give  me  leave,  not  to  answer  this  gentleman's  particulars, 
(for  that  I  shall  defer  till  I  hear  his  proofs,)  but  to  speak 
some  few  things  concerning  myself,  and  this  grievous  im 
peachment  brought  up  against  me."" 

Which  being  yielded  unto  me,  I  then  spake  as  follows '  :— 
"  My  Lords, — My  being  in  this  place  and  in  this  condi 
tion,  recalls  to  my  memory  that  which  I  long  since  read  in 
Seneca :  Tormentum  est}  etiamsi  absolutm  quis  faerit,  causam 
dixisse  m :  'Tis  not  a  grief  only,  no,  'tis  no  less  than  a  torment, 
for  an  ingenuous  man  to  plead  criminally,  much  more  capi 
tally",  at  such  a  bar  as  this ;  yea,  though  it  should  so  fall  out, 
that  he  be  absolved.  The  great  truth  of  this  I  find  at  present 
in  myself;  and  so  much  the  more,  because  I  am  a  Christian ; 
and  not  that  only,  but  in  Holy  Orders;  and  not  so  only,  but 
by  God's  grace  and  goodness  preferred  to  the  greatest  place 
this  Church  affords;  and  yet  now  brought,  causam  dicere, 
to  plead,  and  for  no  less  than  life,  at  this  great  bar.  And 
whatsoever  the  world  thinks  of  me,  (and  they  have  been 
taught  to  think  more  °  ill  than,  I  humbly  thank  Christ  for 
it,  I  was  ever  acquainted  with,)  yet,  my  Lords,  this  I  find, 
tormentum  est,  'tis  no  less  than  torment  to  me  to  appear  in 
this  place  to  such  an  accusation. 

"  Nay,  my  Lords,  give  me  leave,  I  beseech  you,  to  speak 
plain  truth.  No  sentence,  that  can  justly  pass  upon  me,  (and 
other  I  will  never  fear  from  your  Lps.,)  can  go  so  near  me  as 
causam  dixisse,  to  have  pleaded  for  myself  upon  this  occasion 
and  in  this  place.  For  as  for  the  sentence,  (I  thank  God  for 
it,)  I  am  at2  St.  Paul's  ward  :  '  If  I  have  committed  anything 
worthy  of  death,  I  refuse  not  to  die  P  ; '  for  I  bless  God,  I  have 
so  spent  my  time,  as  that  I  am  neither  ashamed  to  live,  nor 

1  ['  their  Lps.  would'  originally  'your  Lps.  will  'J 

2  ['  at '  interlined.] 

1    This   Speech  is    extant  also   in  £c."J 

Rushw.  p.  830,  &c.;  Heylin,  p.  516,          m  Sen.  de  Benef.  c.  28.   [p. 

&c.;  Pryn,  p.  53,  &c.      [IT.  Wharton's  293.  Bipont.  1782.] 
note  in  the  marg.  of  the  MS.  is  this  :          n    '  capitally  or  criminally,'   Rush- 

"  An  imperfect  copy  of  this  Speech  is  worth  and  Pryn. 
published  by  Mr.Prynn,  in  his  History          °  'much  more '  Rushw.  and  Pryn. 
of  the  Trial,  p.  51,  £c.,  and  from  him          F  Acts  xxv.  11. 
by  Dr.  Heylin,  in  Cypr.  Angl.  p.  516, 


Die  Primo.  afraid  to  die.  Nor  can  the  world  be  more  weary  of  me,  than 
I  am  of  it ;  for  seeing  the  malignity  which  hath  been  raised 
against  me  by  some  men,  I  have  carried  my  life  in  my  hands 
these  divers  years  past.  But  yet,  my  Lords,  if  none  of 
these  things,  whereof  these  men  accuse  me,  merit  death  by 
law;  though  I  may  not  in  this  case,  and  from  this  bar,  appeal  2.23 
unto  Cresar;  yet  to  your  Lordships'  justice  and  integrity, 
I  both  may,  and  do  appeal ;  not  doubting,  but  that  God  of 
His  goodness  will  preserve  my  innocency.  And  as  Job,  in 
the  midst  of  his  affliction,  said  to  his  mistaken  friends,  so 
shall  I  to  my  accusers:  'God  forbid  I  should  justify  you; 
till  I  die  I  will  not  remove  my  integrity  from  me ;  I  will 
hold  it  fast,  and  not  let  it  go ;  my  heart  shall  not  reproach 
me,  as  long  as  I  live*1/ 

"  My  Lords,  I  sec  by  the  Articles,  and  have  now  heard 
from  this  gentleman,  that  the  charge  against  me  is  divided 
into  two  main  heads  :  r  the  laws  of  the  land,  and  the  religion 
by  those  laws  established. 

"  For  the  laws  first,  I  think  I  may  safely  say,  I  have  been, 
to  my  understanding,  as  strict  an  observer  of  them  all  the 
days  of  my  life,  so  far  as  they  concern  me,  as  any  man  hath; 
and  since  I  came  into  place,  I  have  followed  them,  and  been 
as  much  guided  by  them,  as  any  (104)  man  that  sat  where 
I  had  the  honour  to  sit.  And  for  this  I  am  sorry  I  have  lost 
the  witness 9  of  the  Lord  Keeper  Coventry,  and  of  some  other 
persons  of  honour,  since  dead.  And  the  learned  Counsel 
at  law,  which  attended  frequently  at  the  Council-table,  can 
witness  (some  of  them*)  that  in  references  to  that  Board, 
and  in  debates  arising  at  the  Board,  I  was  usually  for  that 
part  of  the  cause  where  I  found  law  to  be.  And  if  the 
counsel  desired  to  have  their  client's  cause  referred  to  the 
law,  (well  I  might  move  in  some  cases  for  charity,  or  con 
science,  to  have  admittance,  but)  to  the  law  I  left  them,  if 
thither  they  would  go.  And  how  such  a  carriage  as  this 
through  the  whole  course  of  my  life,  in  private  and  public, 
can  stand  with  an  intention,  nay  a  practice  to  overthrow  the 

2  ['client's'  originally  'counsell'] 

i  Job.  xxvii.  5.  s  '  testimony '  Bush,  and  Pryn. 

r  '  an  endeavour  to  subvert'  [added          l  'here  present'  Heylin,  and  P.u?h. 
by]  Rush,  and  Pryn.  and  Pryn. 


law,  and  to  introduce  an  arbitrary  government,  which  my  DiePrimo. 
soul  hath  always  hated,  I  cannot  yet  see.  And  His  now 
many  years  since  I  learned  of  my  great  master  (in  humanis), 
Aristotle",  Periculosum  esse ;  that  it  is  a  very  dangerous 
thing  to  trust  to  the  will  of  the  judge,  rather  than  the  written 
law.  And  all  kingdoms  and  commonwealths  have  followed 
his  judgment  ever  since ;  and  the  school-disputes  have  not 
dissented  from  itv. 

"  Nay  more,  I  have  ever  heen  of  opinion,  that  human  laws 
bind  the  conscience,  and  have  accordingly  made  conscience 
of  observing  them.  And  this  doctrine  I  have  constantly 
preached,  as  occasion  hath  been  offered  me.  And  how  is  it 
possible  I  should  seek  to  overthrow  those  laws,  which  I  held 
myself  bound  in  conscience  to  keep  and  observe  ?  Especially, 
since  an  endeavour  to  overthrow  law,  is  a  far  greater  crime 
than  to  break  or  disobey  any  particular  law  whatsoever ;  all 
particulars  being  swept  away  in  that  general.  And,  my 
Lords,  that  this  is  my  judgment,  both  of  parliaments  and 
laws;  I  beseech  your  Lordships  that  I  may  read  a  short 
passage  in  *  my  book  against  Fisher  the  Jesuit,  which  was 
printed  and  published  to  the  world  before  these  troubles  fell 
on  me,  and  before  I  could  so  much  as  suspect  this  charge 
could  come  against  me;  and  therefore  could  not  be  pur 
posely  written  to  serve  any  turn  *."  (I  had  leave,  and  did 
read  it ;  but  for  brevity's  sake  refer  the  reader  to  the  book 

"  As  for  religion,  I  was  born  and  bred  up  in,  and  under 
the  Church  of  England,  as  it  yet  stands  established  by  law. 
I  have,  by  God's  blessing  and  the  favour  of  my  Prince, 
grown  up  in  it  to  the  years  which  are  now  upon  me,  and  to 
the  place  of  preferment  which  I  yet^  bear.  And  in  this 
Church,  by  the  grace  and  goodness  of  God,  I  resolve  to  die. 

1  ['in' 

2  ['ant 

originally  'out'] 
and  therefore  .  .  .  turn.'  on  opposite  page.] 

u  Arist,  ii.  Polit.  c.  7,  8.     [The  two  v  Tho.  ii.  2se.  q.  60.  Ar.  5.     [The 

passages  referred  to,  are  the  following  :  '  Conclnsio '  of  this  Article  is ;  "  Neces- 

&i6irtpovKatiToyvu(j.<Ji'Q>sl3€\TlovKpli>(iv,  sarium  est,  quodvis  judicium  semper 

aAAot  Kara  rd  ypd/,Ta  Kal  TOVS  VO/JLOVS.  sccundum  legis  scripturam  fieri."] 

—Cap.  vii.  (al.  ix.)  p.  (38.  Oxon.  1810.  *  Confer,  with  Fisher,   §  26.   num. 

And, To  /i??  Kara  ypd^ara  dpxfiv,  d\\'  14.  p.  211.  [Lond.  1639.;  pp.  234,  235. 

atiToyif(0fj.6v(a$,   liri(j<pa.\ti. — Cap.   viii.  of  the  present  edition.] 

(al.  x)  p.  73.]  y  'now'  Kush.  and  Pryn. 


Die  Prime.  "I  have,  ever  since  I  understood  aught  in  Divinity,  kept 
one  constant  tenor  in  this  my  profession,  without  variation 
or  shifting  from  one  opinion  to  another,  for  any  worldly 
ends.  And  if  my  conscience  would  have  suffered  me  to  shift 
tenets  in  religion  with  time  and  occasion,  I  could  easily  have 
slid  through  all  the  difficulties  which  have  pressed  upon  me 
in  this  kind.  But,  of l  all  diseases,  I  have  ever  hated  a  palsy 
in  religion  z ;  well  knowing,  that  too  often  a  dead-palsy  ends 
that  disease,  in  the  fearful  forgetfulness  of  God  and  His 

"Ever  since  I  came  in  place,  I  laboured  nothing  more, 
than  that  the  external  public  worship  of  God  (too a  much 
slighted  in  most  parts  of  this  kingdom)  might  be  preserved, 
and  that  with  as  much  decency  and  uniformity  as  might  be ; 
being  still  of  opinion,  that  unity  cannot  long  continue  in  the 
Church,  where  uniformity  is  shut  out  at  the  church  door. 
And  I  evidently  saw,  that  the  public  neglect  of  God's  service 
in  the  outward  face  of  it,  and  the  nasty  lying  of  many  places 
dedicated  to  that  service,  had  almost  cast  a  damp  upon  the 
true  and  inward  worship  of  God ;  which,  while  we  live  in  the 
body,  needs  external  helps,  and  all  little  enough  to  keep  it  in 
any  vigour.  And  this  I  did  to 2  the  uttermost  of  my  know 
ledge,  according  both  to  law  and  canon,  and  with  the 
consent  and  liking  of  the  people.  Nor  did  any  command 
issue  out  from  me  against  the  one,  or  without  the  other,  that 
I  know  of. 

"  Further,  my  Lords,  give  me  leave,  I  beseech  you,  to  tell 
you3b  this  also  :  That  I  have  as  little  acquaintance  with  recu 
sants  of  any  sort,  as  I  believe  any  man  of  place  in  England 
hathc.  And  for  my  kindred,  no  one  of  them  was  ever  a 
recusant,  but  Sir  William  Webb,  grandchild  to  my  uncle 
Sir  W.  Webb,  sometimes  Ld.  Mayor  of  London ;  and  him  d, 
with  some  of  his  children,  I  reduced  back  again  to  the 
Church  of  England,  as  is  well  known,  and  I  as  able  to  prove. 

1  ['of  interlined.]  2  ['did  to'  originally  'did  according  to'] 

3  ['  to  tell  you '  originally  written  '  to  acquaint  you  with '] 

z    '  held   a  palsy,   &c.  most   dan-      Pryn. 

gerous ;'  Rushw.  e  '  my  place  hath  or  ever  had  since 

a  '  so '  Rush,  and  Pryn.  the  Reformation.'    Rush,  and  Pryn. 

h  'acquaint  you  with'  Rush,  and          ri  ' since  which,'  Rush,  and  Pryn. 


' '  One  thing  more  I  humbly  desire  may  be  thought  on  :  Die  Prime, 
'tis  this ;  I  am  fallen  into  a  great  deal  of  obloquy  in  matter 
of  religion,  and  that  so  (105)  far,  as  that  'tis  charged  in  the 
Articles,  that  I  have  endeavoured  to  advance  and  bring  in 
Popery.  Perhaps,  my  Lords,  I  am  not  ignorant  what  party 
of  men  have  raised  this  scandal  upon  me,  nor  for  what  end, 
nor  perhaps  by  whom  set  on.  But,  howsoever,  I  would  fain 
have  a  good  reason  given  me,  (if  my  conscience  lead  me e 
that  way,  and  that  with  my  conscience  I  could  subscribe  to 
the  Church  of  Rome,)  what  should  have  kept  me  here  (before 
my  imprisonment)  to  endure  the  libels f,  and  the  slanders, 
and  the  base  usage  in  all  kinds,  which  have  been  put  upon 
me, — and  these  to  end  in  this  question  for  my  life.  I  say, 
I  would  fain  know  a  good  reason  of  this. 

225  "  For  first,  my  Lords,  is  it  because  of  any  pledges  I  have 
in  the  world  to  sway  me  against  my  conscience  ?  No,  sure. 
For  I  have  nor  wife  nor  children,  to  cry  out  upon  me  to  stay 
with  them ;  and  if  I  had,  I  hope  the  call  of  my  conscience 
should  be. heard  above  them. 

"  Or,  secondly,  is  it  because  I  was  loth  to  leave  the  honour 
and  the  profit  of  the  place  '  I  was  risen  unto  ?  Surely  no  : 
for  I  desire  your  Lordships  and  all  the  world  else  should 
know,  I  do  much  scorn  honour  and  profit,  both  the  one 
and  the  other,  in  comparison  of  my  conscience.  Besides,  it 
cannot  be  imagined  by  any  reasonable  man,  but  that  if  I 
could  have  complied  with  Rome,  I  should  not  have  wanted 
either 2  honour  or  profit.  And  suppose  I  could  not  have 
so  much  of  either,  as  here  I  had,  yet  sure,  would  my  con 
science  have  served  me  that  way,  less  of  either  with  my 
conscience  would  have  prevailed  with  me,  more  than  greater 
against  my  conscience. 

"  Or,  thirdly,  is  it  because  I  lived  here  at  ease,  and  was 
loth  to  venture  the  loss  of  that  ?  Not  so  neither :  for  what 
soever  the  world  may  be  pleased  to  think  of  me,  I  have  led 
a  very  painful  life,  and  such  as  I  could  have  been  very  well 
content  to  change,  had  I  well  known  how.  And  had  my 
conscience  led  *  me  that  way,  I  am  sure  I  might  have  lived  at 
1  ['place'  interlined.]  2  ['either'  originally  written  '  both'] 

e  '  stood  '  Rush,  and  Pryn.  *  <  served  '  Rush,  and  Pryn. 

f  'libelling,'   Rush,  and  Pryn. 


DiePrimo.  far  more  ease;  and  either  have  avoided  the  barbarous  libel- 
lings,  and  other  bitter  and  grievous  scorns  which  I  have  here 
endured,  or  at  the  least  been  out  of  the  hearing  of  them. 
Nay,  my  Lords,  I  am  as l  innocent  in  this  business  of  religion, 
as2  free  from  all  practice,  or  so  much  as  thought  of  practice 
for  any  alteration  to  Popery,  or  any  way  blemishing  the  true 
Protestant  religion  established  in  the  Church  of  England,  as 
I  was  when  my  mother  first  bare  me  into  the  world.  And  let 
nothing  be  spoken  against  me  but  truth,  and  I  do  here  chal 
lenge  whatsoever  is  between  heaven  and  hell,  to  say  their 
worst  against  me  in  point  of  my  religion  :  in  which,  by  God's 
grace,  I  have  ever  hated  dissimulation ;  and  had  I  not  hated 
it,  perhaps  it  might  have  been  better  with  me  for  worldly 
safety,  than  now  it  is.  But  it  can  no  way  become  a  Christian 
bishop  to  halt  with  God. 

"  Lastly,  if  I  had  any  purpose  to  blast  the  true  religion 
established  in  the  Church  of  England,  and  to  introduce 
Popery ;  sure  I  took  a  very  wrong  way  to  it.  For,  my  Lords, 
I  have  stayed  as  many  h  that  were  going  to  Home,  and  reduced 
as  many1  that  were  already  gone,  as  (I  believe)  any  bishop 
or  other  minister  in  this  kingdom  hath  done ;  and  some  of 
them  men 3  of  great  abilities,  and  some  of  them  k  persons  of 
great  place.  And  is  this  the  way,  my  Lords,  to  introduce 
Popery  ?  I  beseech  your  Lps.,  consider  it  well.  For  surely, 
if  I  had  blemished  the  true  Protestant  religion,  I  could  not 
have  settled  such  men  in  it 4 :  and  if  I  had  purposed l  to 
introduce  Popery,  I  would  never  have  reduced  such  men 
from  it. 

"  And  though  it  please  the  author  of  the  '  Popish  Koyal 
Favourite/  to  say,  ( That  scarce  one  of  the  swaying  lord 
prelates  is  able  to  say,  that  ever  he  converted  one  papist  to 
our  religion  m ;'  yet  how  void  of  charity  this  speech  of  his  is, 
and  how  full  of  falsehood,  shall  appear  by  the  number  of 

1  ['  as '  originally  written  '  so ']  2  ['  as '  orig.  written  '  so '] 

3  ['men'  originally  written  '  persons'] 

4  ['  I  could  ...  in  it :'  originally  written,  'how  could  I  have  settled'  &c.] 

h  '  more '  Rush,  and  Pryn.  Favo.   p.   71.      [This   is   Archbishop 

5  '  more  '  Rush,  and  Pryn.  Laud's  own  note.]     Pryn,  in  printing 

k  '  men  of  great  abilities,  and  some'  the  Archbishop's  Speech,  omitteth  this 

Rush,  and  Pryn.  whole  passage   concerning  himself. — 

1  '  promised '  Rush,  and  Pryn.  H.  W. 
m  W.  Pryn   in  his    Popish    Royal 


those  persons,  whom,  by  God's  blessing  upon  my  labours,  Die  Primo. 
I  have  settled  in  the  true  Protestant  religion  established  in 
226  England  :  and  with  your  Lps'.  leave,  I  shall  name  them,  that 
you  may  see  both  their  number  and  their  condition ;  though 
I  cannot  set  them  down  in  that  order  of  time,  in  which  I 
either  converted  or  settled  them. 

"  1.  And  first,  Hen.  Birkhead  of  Trinity  Coll.  in  Oxford11, 
was  seduced  by  a  Jesuit,  and  brought  up  to  London  to  be 
conveyed  beyond  the  seas.  His  friends  complained  to  me : 
I  had  the  happiness  to  find  him  out,  and  the  blessing  from 
God  to  settle  his  conscience.  So  he  returned  to  Oxford,  and 
there  continued  °. 

"2.\Two  daughters  of  Sir  Rich.  Lechford  in  Surrey1' 
3. J  were  sent  to  sea  to  be  carried  to  a  nunnery.  I 
heard  of  it,  and  caused  them  to  be  brought  back,  before  they 
were  got  out  of  the  Thames.  I  settled  their  consciences,  and 
both  of  them  sent  me  great  thanks,  since  I  was  a  prisoner  in 
the  Tower. 

(106)  "  4.1  Two  scholars  of  St.  John's  Coll.  in  Cambridge, 
5. /Topping  and  Ashton,  had  slipped  away  from 
the  College,  and  here  at  London  had  got  the  French  ambas 
sador's  pass,  (I  have  the  pass  to  show)  :  I  found  means  to  get 
them  to  me,  and  I  thank  God  settled  both  their  minds,  sent 
them  back  to  their  College.  Afterwards  hearing  of  Topping's 
wants,  I  allowed  him  means  till  I  procured  him  a  Fellowship  1 : 
and  he  is  at  this  time  a  very  hopeful  young  man r,  as  most  of 
his  time  in  that  University,  a  minister,  and  chaplain  in  house 

n  [Henry  Birkhead,  or  Birchhead,  dence  to  affirm  in  the  margin  of  his 
afterwards  elected  Fellow  of  All  Souls  book,  that  this  convert  of  the  Arch- 
College  by  Archbishop  Laud's  influ-  bishop's  was  "  the  author  of  all  the 
ence.  He  retained  his  Fellowship  libellous  Popish  Oxford  Aulicus's,"  al- 
during  the  Rebellion,  but  resigned  it  though  he  knew  full  well,  that  his 
at  the  Restoration,  and  became  Regis-  name  was  John  Birkenhead  ;  and  adds, 
trar  of  the  Diocese  of  Norwich.  He  that  at  the  naming  of  this  convert, 
was  the  founder  of  the  Professorship  most  of  the  lords  and  auditors  smiled  ; 
of  Poetry.  (Wood,  Ath.  Ox.  iv.  573.)]  but  saith  not  one  word  of  the  Arch- 

0  See  Rushworth,    p.  832,  who  re-  bishop's  correction  of  their  mistake. — 

lateth,  that  when  some  of  the  Lords,  H.  W.     [Henry  Wharton  is  mistaken 

hearing  the  name  of  Birkenhead,  and  in   this    remark    of    his   relating   to 

imagining  him  to  be  the  author  of  the  Prynne    (see  Prynne's   Cant.   Doom, 

Oxford    Aulicus,    smiled   at  it;   the  p.  55.)] 

Archbishop  taking  notice  of  it,  stopped  P  [Of  Shelwood  in  that  county.] 

and  assured  the  Lords,  that  he  meant  «  '  in  St.  John's  :'  Rush,  and  Pryn. 

not  him,  but  another  person  of  like  r  [He  held  his  Fellowship  till  he 

name.     Yet  after  all,  Pryn,  in  pub-  was     ejected     by    the    Engagement, 

lishing  this  speech,  hath   the   impu-  (Walker's  Sufferings,  par.  ii.  p.  150.)] 


Die  Primo.  at  this  present  to  the  Right  Honourable  the  Earl  of  West 
morland  s. 

"  6.^1  Sir  Wi.  Webb  my  kinsman,  and  two  of  his  daugh- 

7.  rters;  and  the  better  to  secure  them  in  religion,  I 

8.  J  was  at  the  charge  (their  father  being  utterly  decayed1) 
to  marry  them  l  to  two  religious  Protestants  ;    and  they  both 
continued  very  constant.     9.   And  his  eldest  son  I  took  from 
him,   placed  him  with  a  careful    divine11,    maintained  him 
divers  years,  and  then  settled  him  with  a  gentleman  of  good 

"  10. 1  The  next,  in4  my  remembrance,  was  the  Lord  Maio, 

ll.J  of  Ireland v,  who,  with  another  gentleman  (whose 

name  I  cannot  recal),  was  brought  to  me  to  Fulham,  by  Mr. 

Jefford*,  a  servant  of  his  Majesty's,  and  well  known  to  divers 

of  your  Lordships. 

"  12.  The  Right  Honourable  the  Ld.  Duke  of  Buckingham 
was  almost  lost  from  the  Church  of  England,  between  the 
continual  cunning  labours  of  Fisher  the  Jesuit,  and  the  per 
suasions  of  the  Lady  his  mother  * z.  After  some  miscarriages, 
King  James  of  ever  blessed  memory  commanded  me  to  that 
service.  I  had  God's  blessing  upon  me  so  far,  as  to  settle  my 
Ld.  Duke  to  his  death.  13.  And  I  brought  the  Lady  his 
mother a  to  the  Church  again ;  but  she  was  not  so  happy  as  to 
continue  with  us. 

"  14.  The  Lady  Marquis  (sic)  Hamilton  b  was  much  solicited 
by  some  priests,  and  much  troublecljn  mind  about  it.     My 
Ld.  spake  with  me  of  it;  and  though  at  that  present  I  was  227 
so  overlaid  with  business,  that  I  could  not  (as  I  much  desired) 

1  ['them'  interlined.] 

s  [Mildmay  Fane,  second  Earl  of  *  '  Chesford,'  Rush,  and  Pryn. 

Westmoreland.]  f  '  and  sister.'    Rush,  and  Pryn. 

1  [He  was  supported  in  a  measure  z  [Mary,  the  widow  of  Sir  George  Vil- 

by  the  Archbishop,  as  appears  from  a  liers,  Countess  of  Buckingham  in  her 

receipt  given  by   him   to   the  Arch-  own  right :   after  her  first  husband's 

bishop  for  2QL,  endorsed  in  the  Arch-  death  she  married,  first,  Sir  William 

bishop's  own  hand,  now  preserved  in  Rayner,   and   secondly,    Sir   Thomas 

the  Tanner  MSS.  vol.  Ixx.  fol.  100.]  Compton.] 

u  [Thomas  Webbe,  placed  under  the  n  '  Right  Honourable  the  Countess 

charge  of  Bancroft,  Bishop  of  Oxford.  of  Buckingham,'  Rush,  and  Pryn. 

See  Hist,   of  Chancellorship,   p.  261  b  [Lady  Mary  Feilding,  daughter  of 

of  this  Edit.]  William  Earl  of  Denbigh,  by  Susanna 

v  [Prynne  terms  him,  in  his  mar-  sister   to   George  Duke  of  Bucking- 

ginal    note,    'a  great   actor    in    the  ham.     She  married  James   Duke   of 

late  Irish  Rebellion  against  the  Pro-  Hamilton.] 


wait  upon  that  honourable  person  myself;  yet  I  told  my  Ld.  DiePrimo. 

I  would  send  one  to  his  Lp.,  that  should  diligently  attend 

that  service,  and  that  I  would  give  him  the  best  direction 

I  could.     And  this  I  did,  and,  God  be  thanked,  she  died  very 

quietly,   and  very  religiously,  and  a  good   Protestant :   and 

my  Lord  Marquis  told  me,  he  had  acknowledged  this  service 

of  mine  to  an  honourable  lord,  whom  I  now  see  present. 

"15.  Mr.  Chillingworth's  c  learning  and  abilities  are  suffi 
ciently  known  to  all  your  Lordships.  He  was  gone,  and 
settled  at  Doway.  My  letters  brought  him  back;  and  he 
lived  and  died  a  defender  of  the  Church  of  England.  And 
that  this  is  so,  your  Lps.  cannot  but  know  :  for  Mr.  Pryn  took 
away  l  my  letters,  and  all  the  papers  which  concerned  him, 
and  they  were  examined  at  the  Committee  d. 

"  16.1  Mr.  Digby  was  a  priest;  and  Mr.  James  Gentleman6, 

17.J  a  schoolmaster  in  a  recusant's  house.     This  latter 

was  brought  to  me  by  a  minister  (as  far  as  I  remember)  in 

Buckinghamshire.    I  converted  both  of  them,  and  they  remain 


"  18.  Dr.  Hart,  a  civilian f,  son  to  a  neighbour  of  mine  at 
Fulham.  He  was  so  far  gone,  that  he  had  written  part  of  his 
'  Motives'  which  wrought,  as  he  said,  that  change  in  him. 
I  got  sight  of  them ;  showed  him  wherein  he  was  deceived ; 
had  God's  blessing  to  settle  his  conscience ;  and  then  caused 
an  able  divine  to  answer  his '  Motives/  and  give  him  the  copy. 

"  19.  There  were  beside  these,  Mr.  Christopher  Sebum, 
a  gentleman  of  an  ancient  family  in  Herefordshire ;  and  Sir 
Wi.  Spencer  of  Yarnton  in  Oxfordshire  %. 

"  20.')  The  sons  and  heirs  of  Mr.  Wintchome  h,  and  Mr. 
21.J  Williscot1,  whom  I  sent   with  their  friends'  good 

1  ['took  away'  in  margin.] 

c  "A  desperate  apostate-papist;  Mr.  prefixed  to  his  Works.     It   may    be 

Cheynel's   sermon   at  his  funeral  in-  stated,  however,  that  there  are  in  MSS. 

forms  us  how  good  a  Protestant  he  Lamb.  Numb.  943,  pp.  857 — 935,  se- 

lived   and  died."     Thus   godly  Will,  veral  papers  relating  to  Chillingworth, 

Pryn  in  his   marginal  note  on  this  and  some  of  his  own  letters.] 
place,  p.  56.     [There  are  several  other          e  'a  gentleman,'  Rushw.  and  Pryn. 
marginal    notes   by   Prynne    in    the          *   [This  was  probably  Rich.  Hart  of 

same  style,  which  it  is  not  thought  Alban  Hall.] 
worth  while  to  introduce.]  «  [The  second  baronet.     The  baro- 

d  [It  is  not  necessary  to  give  any  netcy  is  now  extinct.] 
account  of  so  well  known  a  person  as          h  '  Winchcomb,'  Rushw.  and  Pryn. 
Chillingworth.     Antony  Wood's  Me-          !    '  Wollescot,'  Rushw.  and  Pryn. 
moir  may  be  consulted,  and  the  Life 

LAUD. — VOL.  iv. 


DiePrimo.  liking  to  Wadham  College  in  Oxford;  and  I  received  a  certi 
ficate,  anno  1638,  of  their  continuing  in  conformity  to  the 
Church  of  England  :  nor  did  ever  any  of  these  relapse  again 
to  Rome,  but  only  the  old  Countess  of  Buckingham,  and  Sir 
Wi.  Spencer,  that  ever  I  heard  ofk.  .And  if  any  of  your 
Lordships  doubt  of  the  truth  of  any  of  these  particulars,  I  am 
able  and  ready  l  to  bring  full  proof  of  them  all.  And  by  this 
time  I  hope  it  appears,  '  that  one 2  of  the  swaying  prelates  of 
the  time  is 3  able  to  say,  he  hath  converted  one  papist  to  the 
Protestant  religion/  And  let 4  any  clergyman  of  England 5 
come  forth,  and  give  a  better  account  of  his  zeal  to  this 
present  Church. 

"  And  now,  my  Lords,  with  my  most  humble  thanks  for 
your  Lps/  favour  and  patience  in  hearing  me,  I  shall  cease 
to  be  further  troublesome  for  the  present ;  not  doubting  but 
I  shall  be 6  able  to  answer  whatever  shall  be  particularly 
objected  against  me." 

(107)  After  I  had  ended  this  speech,  I  was  commanded  to 
withdraw.  As  I  went  from  the  bar,  there  was  Alderman  Hoyle 
of  York1,  and  some  other,  which  I  knew  not,  very  angry, 
and  saying,  it  was  a  very  strange  conversion  that  I  was  like 
to  make  of  them ;  with  other  terms  of  scorn.  I  went  patiently 
into  the  little  Committee-chamber  at  the  entering  into  the 
House.  Thither  Mr.  Peters m  followed  me  in  great  haste, 
and  began  to  give  me  ill  language,  and  told  me  that  he,  and  228 
other  ministers,  were  able  to  name  thousands,  that  they  had 
converted  n.  I  knew  him  not,  as  having  never  seen  him  (to 
my  remembrance)  in  my  life,  though  I  had  heard  enough  of 

1  ['and  ready'  in  margin.]  2  ['one'  originally  written  'some'] 

3  ['is'  originally  written 'was'] 

*  ['  And  let'  originally  written  '  And  now  let '] 
['of  England' in  margin.]  6  [' be '  interlined.] 

k  '  It  being  only  in  God's  power,  Montaigne,  and  became  Lecturer  of 

not  mine,  to  preserve  them  from  re-  S.  Sepulchre's;  till  he  was  obliged,  on 

lapse.'  Rushw.  and  Pryn.     Note,  that  account  of  his  profligate  conduct,  to 

the  vulgar  copies  of  this  speech,  printed  leave   England.     On  his  return,    he 

in  Rush.  &c.,  are  very  different  from  took  so  active  a  part  with  the  factious 

this,    being   taken  from  the    Arch-  party,  particularly  in  the  King's  death, 

bishop's  mouth  as  he  spoke ;  this  from  that  he  was  especially  excepted  from 

the  original,  as  he  wrote  it. — H.  W.  the  Act  of  Pardon,  and  was  hung  and 

1   [Thomas  Hoyle,  M.P.  for  the  city  quartered  in  1660.] 
of  York.]  n  'Hundreds  of   real   converts   to 

m  [This    notorious    person,    Hugh  Christ,  for  every  one  of  his  pretended 

Peters,  was  originally  an  actor ;  he  ones,  and  that  himself  had  converted 

was  afterwards   ordained  by  Bishop  above  120  papists.'     Pryn,  p.  56. 


him.  And  as  I  was  going  to  answer  him,  one  of  my  counsel,  Die  Prime. 
Mr.  Hearn,  seeing  how  violently  he  began,  stepped  between 
us,  and  told  him  of  his  uncivil  carriage  towards  me  in  my 
affliction  :  and  indeed  he  came  as  if  he  would  have  struck  me. 
By  this  time,  some  occasion  brought  the  E.  of  Essex  into  that 
room,  and  Mr.  Hearn  complained  to  him  of  Mr.  Peters  his 
usage  of  me ;  who  very  honourably  checked  him  for  it,  and 
sent  him  forth.  Not  long  after l,  Mr.  Hearn  was  set  upon 
by  Alderman  Hoyle,  and  used  as  coarsely  as  Peters  had  used 
me,  and  (as  far  as  I  remember)  only  for  being  of  counsel  with 
such  a  one  as  I ;  though  he  was  assigned  to  that  office  by 
the  Lords. 

What  put  them  into  this  choler,  I  know  not ;  unless  they 
were  angry  to  hear  me  say  so  much  in  my  own  defence ; 
especially  for  the  conversion  of  so  many,  which  I  think  they 
little  expected.  For  the  next  day  a  great  lord  met  a  friend 
of  mine,  and  grew  very  angry  with  him  2  about  me ;  not  for 
bearing  to  ask  what  I  meant,  to  name  the  particulars,  which 
I  had  mentioned  in  the  end  of  my  speech,  saying,  many  godly 
ministers  had  done  more.  And  not  long  after  this,  (the  day 
I  now  remember  not,)  Mr.  Peters 3  came  and  preached  at 
Lambeth,  and  there  told  them  in  the  pulpit,  that  a  great 
prelate,  their  neighbour,  (or  in  words  to  that  effect,)  had 
bragged  in  the  Parliament-house,  that  he  had  converted 
two-and-twenty ;  but  that  he  had  wisdom  enough,  not  to  tell 
how  many  thousands  he  had  perverted;  with  much  more 
abuse.  God  of  His  mercy  relieve  me  from  these  reproaches, 
and  lay  not  these  men's  causeless  malice  to  their  charge. 

After  a  little  stay,  I  received  my  dismission  for  that  time, 
and  a  command  to  appear  again  the  next  day  at  nine  in  the 
morning ;  which  was  my  usual  hour  to  attend,  though  I  was 
seldom  called  into  the  House  in  two  hours  after. 

1  ['after,'  interlined.]  2  ['him'  interlined.] 

3  ['  Mr.  Peters'  interlined.] 

JP  2 


CAP.  XXIII.  229 


Mar.  13,  1  CAME  as  commanded.  But  here  before  the  charge  begins, 
J,64£-  dDie  I  shall  set  down  the  Article^,  upon  which,  according  to  the 
order  of  March  9,  they  which  were  entrusted  with  the  evi 
dence,  meant  this  day  to  proceed.  They  were  the  first  and 
second  original  Articles,  and  the  second  additional  Article ; 
which  follow  in  these  words  : — 

1.  That  he  hath  traitorously  endeavoured  to  subvert  the 
fundamental   laws    and  government   of  the   kingdom  of 
England,  and  instead  thereof,  to  introduce  an  arbitrary 
and  tyrannical  government  against  law ;  and  to  that  end 
hath  wickedly  and  traitorously  advised  his  Majesty,  that 
he  might  at  his  own  will  and  pleasure  levy  and  take 
m,oney  of  his  subjects,  without  their  consent  in  Parlia 
ment ;    and  this  he  affirmed  was  warrantable  by  the  law 
of  God. 

2.  He  hath  for  the  better  accomplishment  of  that  his  trai 
torous  design,  advised  and  procured  divers  sermons  and 
other  discourses  to  be  preached,  printed,  and  published : 
in  which  the  authority  of  Parliaments,  and  the  force  of 
the  laws  of  the  kingdom,  are  denied,  and  an  absolute  a,nd 
unlimited  power   over   the  persons   and   estates   of  his 
Majesty's  subjects  is  maintained  and  defended,  not  only 
in  the  King,  but  also  in  himself  and  other  bishops,  above 
and  against  the  law ;  and  he  hath  been  a  great  protector, 
favourer,  and  promoter  of  the  publishers  of  such  false  and 
pernicious  opinions. 

Second  additional  Article  : — 

2.   That  within  the  space  of  ten  years  last  past,  the  said 
Archbishop  hath  treacherously  endeavoured  to  subvert  the 


fundamental  laws  of  this  realm ;  and  to  that  end  hath  Die 
in  like  manner  endeavoured  to  advance  the  power  of  the  e 
Council- table,  the  Canons  of  the  Church,  and  the  King's 
prerogative,  above  the  laws  and  statutes  of  the  realm. 
And  for  manifestation  thereof,  about  six  years  last  past, 
being  then  a  privy  counsellor  to  his  Majesty,  and  sitting 
at  the  Council-table,  he  said,  '  That  as  long  as  he  sat 
there,  they  should  know  that  an  order  of  that  Board 
should  be  of  equal  force  with  a  law  or  act  of  Parlia 
ment.'  And  at  another  time  used  these  words,  f  That  he 
(108)  hoped  ere  long,  that  the  Canons  of  the  Church  and 
the  King's  prerogative  should  be  of  as  great  power  as  an 
Act  of  Parliament.'  And  at  another  time  said,  '  That 
those  which  would  not  yield  to  the  King's  power,  he  would 
crush  them  to  pieces.' 

.^30  These  three  Articles  they  begun  with ;  and  the  first  man 
appointed  to  begin  was  Mr.  Maynard.  And  after  some 
general  things  against  me,  as  if  I  were  the  most  violent  man 
for  all  illegal  ways ;  the  first  particular  charged  against  me  1  1. 
was  out  of  my  Diary.  The  words  these  :  '  The  King  declared 
his  resolution  for  a  Parliament  in  case  of  the  Scottish  Re 
bellion.  The  first  movers  of  it  were  my  Lord  Deputy  of 
Ireland,  the  Lord  Marquis  Hamilton,  and  myself.  And  a 
resolution  voted  at  the  Board,  to  assist  the  King  in  extra 
ordinary  ways,  if  the  Parliament  should  prove  peevish,  and 
refuse,  &c.a'  The  time  was  Decemb.  5,  1639.  That  which 
was  enforced  from  these  words  was,  first,  that  I  bestowed 
the  epithet  ( peevish '  upon  the  Parliament ;  and  the  second, 
that  this  voting  fto  assist  the  King  in  extraordinary  ways, 
in  case  the  Parliament  refused/  proceeded  from  my  counsel. 

1.  To  this  I  replied :  And  first  I  humbly  desired  o  nee  for 
all 2,  that  all  things  concerning  law  may  be  saved  entire  unto 
me,  and  my  Counsel  to  be  heard  in  every  such  particular. 

2.  Secondly,  That  the  epithet  ' peevish'  was  a  very  peevish 
word,  if  written  by  me.     "  I  say,  '  if : '  for  I  know  into  whose 


the  first  .  .  .  against  me '  in  marg.] 
once  for  all,'  in  marg.] 

[See  vol.  Hi.  p.  233.] 


Die  hands  my  book  is  fallen ;  but  what  hath  been  done  with  it 

I  know  not.     This  is  to  be   seen,  some   passages    in  that 
book  are  half  burnt  out b,  whether  purposely,  or  by  chance, 
God   knows :    and    some   other   papers   taken  by  the  same 
hand  from  me,  are  now  wanting.     Is  it  not  possible  there 
fore  some  art  may  be  used  in  this  ?  "     Besides,  if  I  did  use 
the  word  '  peevish,'  it  was  in  my  private  pocket-book,  which 
I  well  hoped  should  never  be  made  public;    and  then  no 
disgrace  thereby  affixed  to  the  a  Parliament.     And  I  hope, 
should  a  man  forget  himself  in  such  an  expression  of  some 
passage  in  some  one  Parliament,  (and  this  was  no  more,)  it 2 
is  far  short  of  anything  that  can  be  called  3  treason.     Aud 
yet  further,  most  manifest  it  is  in  the  very  words  themselves, 
that  I  do  not  bestow  the  title  upon  that  Parliament,  in  that 
case ;    but  say  only,   '  if  it  should  prove  peevish ;'  which  is 
possible,   doubtless,  that  in  some  particulars  a  Parliament 
may :  though  for  the  happiness  of  this  kingdom,  I  would  to 
God  it  were  impossible.   But  suppose  the  word  ' peevish'  had 
been 4  absolutely  spoken  by  me ;  is  it  lawful  upon  record  to 
say  the  Parliament  an.  42  Hen.  III.  was  insanum  Parlia- 
mentum,  a  mad  Parliament;    and  that  in  the   6   Hen.  IV. 
indoctum,  an  unlearned  Parliament ;  and  that  in  the  4  Hen. 
VI.  a  Parliament  of  clubs  c  ?     And  shall  it  be  high  treason 
in   me   to    say  a    Parliament  in    some    one   particular   was 
peevish  ?  or  but  to  suppose  if  it  were  ?    Can  any  man  think, 
that  an  unlearned,  or  a  mad  Parliament,  or  one  of  clubs,  did 
not  do  something  peevishly?     Might  my  predecessor,  Tho. 
Arundel,  tell  the  Commons  openly  in  Parliament,  that  their 
petitions  were  sacrilegious  d  ?     And  may  not  I  so  much  as 
suppose  some  one  action  of  a  Parliament  to  be  peevish,  but 
it   shall    be    treason  ?       May   an  ordinary  historian   say  of 
that  unlearned  Parliament,   that  the  Commons  were  fit  to 
enter  common  with  their  cattle e,  for  any  virtue  they  had 

1  ['the'  interlined.]  2  ['it'  interlined.] 

3  ['  anything  .  .  .  called  '  on  opposite  page.] 

4  ['  had  been '  originally  '  were '] 

b  [See  vol.  iii.  p.  235.]  d  Speed,  in  Hen.  IV.  §  42.  [p.  619. 

c  Sir  Ed.  Cook,  Inst.  p.  3.  c.  1.  [p.  2.      col.  1.  Lond.  1611.] 
Lond.  1648.]  e  Ibid,  [infra.] 


more  than  brute  beasts  ?  And  may  not  I  in  my  private  notes  Die 
write  the  word  '  peevish  '  of  them  without  treason  l  ?  Secundo. 

231  3.  Thirdly,  Whereas  'tis  said,  '  That  the  voting  at  the 
Council-table  to  assist  the  King  in  extraordinary  ways,  if 
&c.,  was  by  my  counsel :'  there  is  no  such  thing  in  my  Diary. 
There  is,  that  I  with  others  advised  a  Parliament :  but  there 
is  not  one  word,  that  the  voting  mentioned  at  the  Council- 
table  proceeded  from  any  advice  of  mine.  So  there  is  no 
proof  from  my  Diary  ;  "  and  other  proof  beside  that,  was  not 
so  much  as  urged;  which  was  not  in  favour,  but  because 
they  had  it  not.  For  had  they  had  any  other  proof,  I  see 
already,  it  should  not  have  been  lost  for  want  of  urging  2." 
Where,  I  desired  their  Lps.  also  to  observe,  in  what  a  diffi 
culty  I  have  lived  with  some  men,  who  will  needs  make  me 
a  great  enemy  to  Parliaments,  and  yet  are  angry  with  me, 
that  I  was  one  with  others  who  moved  for  that  Parliament. 
So  it  seems,  nothing  that  I  do  can  content  some  men,  for 
a  Parliament,  or  against  it ;  nothing  must  be  well,  if  the 
counsel  be  mine. 

4.  Fourthly,   For  '  the  voting  of  assistance  in  extraordi 
nary  ways/  I  was  included  in  the  general  vote  of  the  Table ; 
and  therefore  that  cannot  be  called  or  accounted  my  counsel. 

5.  Fifthly,  It  is  expressed  in  my  Diary,  whence  all  this 
proof  is  taken,  that  it  was  in  and  for  the  Scottish  business, 
and  so  is  within  the  Act  of  Oblivion f.     "  And  these  answers 
I  gave  to  Mr.  Brown,   when,  in  the   summing  -up    of  the 
charge  against  me  in  the  honourable  House  of  Commons, 
he  made  this  to  be  my  counsel  to  the  King  :  and  he  began 
with  it,  in  his  charging  of  the  points  against  law  V 

The  second  particular  this  day  charged  against  me,  was,   II. 
That  after  the  ending  of  the  late  Parliament,  I  did  use  these 
words  to  the  King,  ( That  now  he  might  use  his  own  power/ 
or  words  to  that  effect.    This  was  attested  by  Sir  Henry  Vane 
the  elder,  then  a  counsellor,  and  presents. 

1  ['  But  suppose  the  word  .  .  .  treason ]'  on  opposite  page.] 

2  ['  For  had  they  .  .  .  urging.'  on  opposite  page.] 

3  ['Fourthly,  .  .  .  against  law.'  on  a  separate  paper.] 

f  [See  above,  p.  45.]  order  of  the  House,  he  being  too  ill  to 

e  [The  examination  of  Sir  H.  Vane      attend.  The  substance  of  the  evidence 

had  been  taken  by  Commission,  by      is  given  in  Lords' Journals,  March  13.] 


l>ie  1.  To  this  my  answer  was,  That  I  spake  not  these  words, 

Secundo.        .A,  .  ,, 

either  111  terms,  or  in  sense,  to  the  uttermost  of  my  memory. 

2.  Secondly,    If  I  had   spoken   these  words,   either  they 
were  ill-advised  words,  but  no  treason ;  and  then  they  come 
not  home  to  the  charge :  or  they  are  treasonable,  and  then 
I    ought    by  law  to    have  been   tried  within   six   months1'. 
"  Mr.  Brown,  in  his  reply  to  me  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
said,  That  this  statute  expired  with  the  Queen,  because  it 
concerned  none  but  her,  and  the  heirs  of  her  body.     I  had 
here  urged  Sir  Edward  Coke1,  as  urging  this  statute,  and 
commending  the  moderation  of  it.     But  I  was  therein  mis 
taken,  for  he  speaks  of  1  Eliz.  c.  iJ     And  that  statute  is  in 
force,  and  is  for  trial  within  six  months,  for  such  crimes  as 
are  within  that  statute.      So  it  comes  all  to  one  for  my  cause, 
so  either  of  the  statutes  be  in  force.     And  to  this  charge  in 
general,  I  gave  the  same  answers  which  are  here  l." 

3.  Thirdly,   Sir  Hen.  Vane  is  in  this  a   single  witness  ; 
whereas   by  law,   he  that  is    accused    of  treason,  must  be 
convicted  by  two  witnesses,  or  his  own  confession  without 
violence  k;  neither  of  which  is  in  this  case  :  t(  And  strange  it 
is  to  me,  that  at  such  a  full  Table,   no  person  of  honour 
should  remember  such  a  speech,  but  Sir  Henry  Vane  *." 

4.  Fourthly,  Both  this  and  the  former  charge  relate  to  the  232 
Scottish   business,  and  so  are  within  the  Act  of  Oblivion, 
which  I  have  pleaded. 

"  Besides,  here  is  nothing  expressed  in  the  words  charged, 
which  savours  of  practice,  conspiracy,  combination  of  force ; 
and  cannot  therefore  (109)  possibly  be  adjudged  treason; 
especially  since  there  is  no  expression  made  in  the  words 
witnessed,  what  power  is  meant.  For  what  should  hinder 
the  King  to  use  his  own  power,  but  legal  still ;  since  nothing 
is  so  properly  a  King's  own  power,  as  that  which  is  made  or 
declared  his  own  by  law.  As  for  the 3  inference,  That  <  this 
was  called  his  own,  in  opposition  to  law:'  first,  Sir  Henry 

1  ['  Mr.  Brown,   .  .   .   are  here.'  inserted  afterwards,  mostly  on  a  separate 

2  ['And  strange  .  .  .  Vane.'  inserted  afterwards,  mostly  on  a  separate  paper! 

3  ['the'  interlined.] 

11  1  Eliz.  c.  6.  §  antepenult.  c.  12.  [§  19.] 

1    Part  4.  Instit.  c.  74.  [p.  324.]  k  1  Ed.  VI.  c.  12.  §  ult.  and  1  Eliz 

i    1  Eliz.  c.  1.  [§  31.]  and  1  Ed.  VI.      c.  6.  §  ult. 


Vane  is  a  witness  to  the  words  only,  and  not  to  any  infe-  Die 
renoe  :  so  the  words  have  but  one  witness,  and  the  l  inference    ( 
none.     And  perhaps  it  were  as  well  for  themselves,  as  for 
persons  questioned  in  great  courts,  if  they  who  are  employed 
about  the  evidence  would  be  more  sparing  of  their  inferences ; 
many  men  laying  hold  of  them  without  reason  or  proof1. 

"  Lastly,  for  the  honour  of  Sir  Henry  Vane  let  me  not 
forget  this ;  he  is  a  man  of  some  years,  and  memory  is  one 
of  the  first  powers  2  of  man  on  which  age  works ;  and  yet 
his  memory  so  good,  so  fresh,  that  he  alone  can  remember 
words  spoken  at  a  full  Council-table,  which  no  person  of 
honour  remembers  but  himself.  Had  any  man  else  remem 
bered  such  words,  he  could  not  have  stood  single  in  this 
testimony.  But  I  would  not  have  him  brag  of  it :  for  I  have 
read  in  St.  Augustin m,  that  quidam  pessimi,  some,  even  the 
worst  of  men,  have  great  memories,  and  are  tanto  pejores,  so 
much  the  worse  for  having  them.  God  bless  Sir  Henry." 

I  have  stayed  the  longer  upon  these  two,  because  they 
were  apprehended  to  be  of  more  weight  than  most  which 
follow.  The  next  was  a  head  containing  my  illegal  pressures 
for  money,  under  which  the  next  particular  was3,  That  in  III. 
the  case  of  ship-money  I  was  very  angry  against  one  Samuel 
Sherman  of  Dedham  in  Essex.  That  I  should  say  Dedham 
was  a  maritime  town :  and  that  when  the  sum  demanded  of 
him 4  was  named,  I  should  say,  a  proper  sum ;  whereas  the 
distress  came  to  eleven  subsidies  n. 

To  this  I  answered :  First,  here  was  no  proof  but  Sher 
man  ;  and  in  his  own  cause. 

Secondly,  he  himself  says  no  more,  than  that  'he  believes' 
I  was  the  instrument  of  his  oppression  (as  he  called  it) : 
whereas  his  censure  was  laid  upon  him  by  the  Council-table, 
riot  by  me ;  nor  was  I  in  any  other  fault,  than  that  I  was 

1  ['  the  '  interlined.]  a  ['powers'  originally  written  '  things'] 

3  ['  The  next  .  .  .  was/  on  opposite  page.  Originally  written,  '  The  third 
particular  was/]  4  ['  demanded  of  him  '  in  margin.] 

1  The  dreadful  licence  of  inferences  minus  possunt,   quod  male  cogitanfc, 

among  our  English  pleaders  in  cases  oblivisci." —  S.]  Aug.   1.  vii.   de  Civ. 

of  death.  —  Speed,  in  H.  VII.    §  61.  Dei,  c.  3.  [Op.,  torn.  vii.  col.  266.  B.] 
[p.  746.  col.  1.]  n  [The  sum  demanded  of  the  town 

m  ["  Quidam  vero  pessimi  memoria  of   Dedham    was  206?.     (See   Lords' 

sunt   mirabili,   tanto  pejores,  quanto  Journals.)] 


Die  present,  and  gave  my  vote  with  the  rest.     So  here's  no  proof 

Secundo.  ,,    7     ,   -,  .     -,    n.    ~ 

at  all,  but  his  belief. 

"  Lastly,  here  can  be  no  treason,  but  against  Dedham,  or 
Sherman,  that  I  can  discover." 

IV.  The  next  to  Sherman  comes  in  my  great  friend,  Alderman 
Atkins  ;  and  he  testifies,  That  when  he  was  brought  to  the 
Council- table,  about  the  ship-money,  none  was  so  violent 
against  him  as  I  was,  and  that  this  pressure  for  ship-money 
was  before  the  Judges  had  given  sentence  for  the  King1.  And 
that  at  another  time  I  pressed  him  hard  to  lend  money,  the 
King  being  present :  at  which  time  he  conceived  that  I  233 
favoured  Alderman  Harrison  for  country  sake;  because  him 
self  Avas  committed,  and  not  the  other2. 

To  this  I  must  confess,  I  did  use  to  be  serious  and  zealous 
too  in  his  Majesty's  service  ;  but  not  with  any  the  least 
intention  to  violate  law.  And  if  this  here  instanced  were 
before  the  judgment  given  for  the  King,  yet  it  was  long  after 
the  Judges  had  put  the  legality  of  it  under  their  hands0. 
And  I  for  my  part  could  not  conceive  the  Judges  would  put 
that  under  their  hands  to  be  law,  which  should  after  be  found 
unlawful.  Therefore  in  this,  as  I  erred  with  honourable  com 
pany  at  the  Council-table,  so  both  they  and  I  had,  as  we 
thought,  sufficient  guides  to  lead  us. 

As  for  the  partiality  which  he  puts  upon  me  in  preserving 
my  countryman,  Alderman  Harrison,  from  prison :  First,  he 
himself  durst  not  affirm  it  upon  his  oath,  but  says  only  that 
'  he  conceives ;  I  favoured  him ;  but  his  conceit  is  no  proof. 
Secondly,  if  I  had  favoured  him,  and  done  him  that  office, 
'tis  far  short  of  treason.  But  the  truth  is,  Alderman  Harrison 
gave  a  modest  and  a  civil  answer ;  but  this  man  was  rough, 
even  to  unmannerliness,  and,  so  far  as  I  remember,  was 
committed  for  that. 

"  And  whereas  he  says,  I  pressed  him  hard  to  lend  money, 
and  that  none  was  so  violent  as  I ;  he  is  much  mistaken. 
For  of  all  men  in  that  fraternity,  I  durst  never  press  him 
hard  for  anything,  least  of  all  for  money.  For  I  knew  not 

1  ['and  that .  .  .  King-.'  on  opposite  page.] 

2  [Here  originally  added,  but  erased.  '  And  that  this  for  ship-money.'] 

0  [The  Judges  had  delivered  their  not  delivered  against  Hampden  till 
opinion  on  the  legality  of  ship-money  June  14, 1638.  (See  Rush  worth's  Col- 
February  163£;  but  judgment  was  lections,  vol.  ii.  pp.  355,  600.)] 


what  stuffing  might  fly  out  of  so  full  a  cushion,  as  afterwards,  Die 
'tis  said1,  there  did,  when,  being  a2  colonel,  he  was  pressed,  Secundo- 
but  not  hard,  in  a  little  skirmishing  in  Finsbury  Fields?." 

Then  it  was  urged,  that  I  aggravated  a  crime  against  V. 
Alderman  Chambers,  and  told  him,  that  if  the  King  had 
many  such  chambers,  he  would  have  never  a  chamber  to  rest 
in  :  that  in  the  case  of  tonnage  and  poundage  he  laboured  to 
take  bread  from  the  King q :  and  that  I  pressed  upon  him  in 
the  business  of  coat  and  conduct-money. 

(110)  To  this  I  gave  this  answer,  That  by  the  affection 
Mr.  Chambers  then  showed  the  King,  I  had  some  reason  to 
think,  he  desired  so  many  chambers  to  his  use3,  that  if  the 
King  had  many  such  subjects,  he  might  want  a  chamber  for 
himself;  or  to  that  effect4  :  and  the  violence  of  his  carriage 
in  that  honourable  assembly  gave  just  occasion  to  other  men 
to  think  so.  But  as  for  the  business  of  tonnage  and  poundage13, 
and  of  coat  and  conduct-money,  I  conceived  both  were  lawful 
on  the  King's  part.  And  I  was  led  into  this  opinion  by  the 
express  judgment  of  some  lords  present,  and  the  silence  of 
others  in  that  behalf;  none  of  the  great  lawyers  at  the  table 
contradicting  either  :  and  no  witness  to  this  but  Alderman 
Chambers  himself. 

The  sixth  particular  was,  That5  I  urged  the  business  of  VI. 
ship-money  upon  Alderman  Adams r. 

To  this  my  answer  was,  That  I  never  pressed  the  ship- 
money  but  as  other  lords  did  at  the  Council-table,  nor  upon 
other  grounds  :  nor  doth  Aid.  Adams  say  any  more,  than  that 
he  was  pressed  to  this  payment  '  by  me  and  others/  And  to 
me  it  seems  strange,  and  will,  I  hope,  to  all  men  else,  that 
234  this,  and  the  like,  should  be  a  common  act  of  the  Lords  at 
the  Council- table,  but  should  be  high  treason  in  nobody  but 
in  me.  And  howsoever,  if  it  be  treason,  'tis  against  three 
aldermen,  Atkins,  Chambers,  and  Adams. 

The  seventh  particular  was,  That  I  was  so  violent  about   VII. 

['  'tis  said,'  in  marg.]  2  ['  a '  interlined.] 

3  ['his  use,'  in  marg.     Originally  written  '  himself/] 
*  ['or  to  that  effect:'  in  marg.]  5  ['  That '  interlined.] 

P  [Archbishop  Bancroft  terms  this  1  [See  Kushworth's  Collections,  vol. 

'  an  unsavoury  passage,'  and  remarks  i.  p.  639,  and  vol.  ii.  p.  9.] 

on  the  quibble  subsequently  made  on  r  [  Addams  and  Warner  were  Sheriffs 

Alderman  Chambers'*  name.]  of  London,  1639,  1640.] 


Pie  the  slighting  of  the   King's  proclamations,  as  that   I   said, 

feccundo.  „ 

A  proclamation  was  ot  as  great  force,  or  equal  to  a  statute- 
law  :  and  that  I  compared  the  King  to  the  stone  spoken  of  in 
the  Gospel,  that  *  Whosoever  falls  upon  it  shall  be  broken ; 
but  upon  whomsoever  it  falls,  it  will  grind  him  to  powder8/ 
And  for  this  they  brought  three  witnesses,  Mr.  Griffin,  and 
Tho.  Wood,  and  Rich.  Hayles1*. 

1.  This  was  in  the  case  of  the  soap-business,  and  the  two" 
witnesses  were  soap-boilers.  They  and  their  Company  slighted 
all  the  proclamations  which  the  King  set  out2  :  and  all  the 
Lords  in  the  Star- Chamber  were  much  offended  (as  I  conceive 
they  had  great  reason  to  be)  at  the  great  and  open  daring  of 
that  whole  Company.     And  whatsoever  sentence  passed  upon 
them   in  that  whole   business,  was  given3  by  the   Court   of 
Star-Chamber,  not  by  me. 

For  the  words ;  First,  these  men  have  good  memories, 
that  can  punctually,  being  plain  ordinary  men,  swear  words 
spoken  full  twelve  years  since  :  and  yet,  as  good  as  their 
memory  is,  they  swear  doubtfully  touching  the  time ;  as  that 
the  words  were  spoken  in  May  1632  or  33. 

2.  Secondly,  my  Lords,  'tis  impossible  these  \\ords  should 
be  spoken  by  me.     For  I  think  no  man  in  this  honourable 
presence  thinks  me  so  ignorant,  as  that  I  should  not  know 
the  vast  difference  that  is  between  an  Act  of  Parliament  and 
a  Proclamation.     Neither  can  these  gentlemen  which  press 
the  evidence  think  me  so  wilfully  foolish  so  to  speak,  con 
sidering  they  accuse  me  here  for  a  cunning  delinquent.    "  So 
God  forgive  these  men  the  falsehood  and  the  malice  of 'this 

3.  For  the  words  spoken  of  the  stone  in  Scripture,  'tis  so 
long  since,  I  cannot  recal  whether  I  said  it  or  no ;  nor  have 
I  any  great  reason  to  believe  these 5  angry  witnesses  in  their 
own  cause.     But  if,  by  way  of  allusion,  I  did  apply  that  place 
to  the  King  and  them,  'tis  far  enough  from  treason.     "  And 

'  and  Kich.  Hayles.'  in  marg.] 

'concerning  that  business'  erased.]  3  ['given  '  interlined.] 

'  the  falsehood  .  .  .  oath.'  on  opposite  page. 

'  these '  originally  written  '  these  two '] 

8  S.  Mat.  xxi.  44.  Hay.'] 

1  [The  names  as  given  in  the  Lords'          u  'two  of  the' 
Journals  are  '  Griffith,  Woodstock,  and 


let  them,  and  their  like,  take  heed  lest  it  prove  true  upon  Die 
themselves  :  for  seldom  do  subjects  fall  upon  their  king,  but  Secundo- 
in  the  end  they  are  broken ;  and  if  it  so  happen  that  he  falls 
upon  them,  they  are  ground  to  powder."  And  Salomon 
taught  me  this  answer,  where  he  says,  '  The  anger  of  a  king 
is  death  V  And  yet  I  would  not  be  mistaken.  For  I  do 
not  conceive  this  is  spoken  of  a  king  and  his  natural  anger 
(though  it  be  good  wisdom  to  stir  as  little  passion  in  kings  as 
-  may  be)  ;  but  of  his  legal  anger  :  according  to  which,  if  the 
stone  roll  strictly,  few  men  can  so  live,  but  for  something  or 
other  they  may  be  in  danger  of  grinding. 

4.  And  for  these  soap-boilers,  they  have  little  cause  to  be 
so  vehement  against  me.  For  if  the  sentence  passed  against 
them  in  the  Star-Chamber  ^  were  in  anything  illegal,  though 
it  were  done  by  that  court,  and  not  by  me  ;  yet  I  alone,  so 
soon  as  I  heard  but  muttering  of  it,  was  the  only  means  of 
resettling  them  and  their  trade,  "  which  none  of  all  the 
Lords  else  took  care  of.  And  the  sum  of  these  answers  I 
gave  to  Mr.  Browne,  when  he  gave  up  the  sum  of  his  charge 
against  me1." 

235  The  next  particular  was  about  depopulations.  A  Commis-  VIII. 
sion  of  Grace,  to  compound  with  some  delinquents  in  that 
kind,  was  issued  under  the  broad  seal  to  some  Lords  and 
other  persons  of  honour  of  the  Council,  of  which  I  wras  one. 
One  Mr.  Talboys  was  called  thither.  And  the  charge  about 
this  was,  that  when  he  pleaded,  that  by  statute  39  Eliz.z  he 
might  convert  some  to  pasture,  I  should  say,  '  Do  you  plead 
law  here  ?  Either  abide  the  order,  or  take  your  trial  at  the 
Star-Chamber:'  and  that  he  was  fined  50/. 

In  this  particular,  Mr.  Talboys  is  single,  and  in  his  own 
cause;  (111)  but  I  was  single  at  no  sitting  of  that  Commis 
sion  :  nor  did  I  ever  sit  unless  the  Lord  Privy  Seal  and  Mr. 
Secretary  Coke  were  present ;  that  we  might  have  direction 
from  their  knowledge  and  experience. 

And  for  the  words,  (if  spoken,)  they  were  not  to  derogate 
from  the  law;  but  to  show,  that  we  sat  not  there  as  any 

1   ['  took  care  of  ...  against  me.'  on  opposite  page.] 

Prov.  xvi.  14.  iii.  Append,  p.  109.] 

[See  Rush  worth's  Collections,  vol.          «  [39  Eliz.  cap.  ii.] 


Die  judges  of  the  law,  but  to  offer  his  Majesty's  grace  to  such  as 

Secundo.  J   .A 

would  accept  it. 

As  for  the  fine  mentioned,  we  imposed  none  upon  him  or 
any  other,  but  by  the  consent  of  the  parties  themselves.  If 
any  man  thought  he  was  not  faulty,  and  would  not  accept  of 
the  favour  showed  him,  we  left  him  to  the  law.  But  the  plain 
truth  is,  this  gentleman,  being  tenant  to  the  Dean  and  Chapter 
of  Christ-Church  in  Oxford,  offered  them,  as  they  conceived, 
great  wrong  in  the  land  he  held  of  them  ;  insomuch  as l  they 
feared  other  their  tenants  might  follow  his  example,  and 
therefore  complained  of  him.  And  because  I  laid  open  his 
usage  of  his  landlords  before  the  Commissioners,  he  comes 
here  to  vent  his  spleen  against  me.  "  And  'tis  observable, 
that  in  all  the  business  of  depopulations,  in  which  so  many 
appeared,  no  one  complained,  either  against  me  or  any  other 
lord,  but  only  this  Talboys.  Mr.  Browne,  when  he  pressed 
the  sum  of  this  charge  against  me,  added,  that  at  the  Council- 
table  I  was  for  all  illegal  projects,  as  well  as  for  these  in- 
closures.  But  first,  I  was  neither  for  this  nor  any  other,  either 
longer  or  otherwise  than  I  understood  them  to  be  lawful. 


And  secondly,  I  opposed  there  the  business  of  salt  and  the 
base  money ;  and  I  alone  took  off  that  of  the  malt,  and  the 
brewing :  and  three  gentlemen  of  Hertfordshire  (which  county 
was  principally  concerned  in  the  case  of  the  malt)  came  over 
to  Lambeth  to  give  me  thanks  for  it2." 

IX.  Then  was  charged  upon  me  the  printing  of  books,  which 
asserted  the  King's  prerogative  above  law,  &c.  The  instance 
was  in  Dr.  CowelFs  book,  verbo,  Rex a :  that  this  book  was 
decried  by  proclamation13;  that  complaint  was  made  to  me3, 
that  this  book  was  printing  in  a  close  house,  without  licence 4, 
and  by  Hodgkinson,  who  was  my  printer ;  that  I  referred 

1  ['  as '  interlined.] 

2  ['pressed  the  sum  .  .  .  thanks  for  it.'  on  opposite  page.] 

3  ['made  to  me'  originally  written  'made  to  me  of  this.     That  I  referred 
it  to  Sir  ,To.  Lambe,']  4  ['without  licence,'  in  marg.] 

•  No  such  word  there  sure  :  it  should  King,  it  was  called  in  by  Proclamation, 

be  '  Prserogativa  Regis.'— W.  S.  A.  C.  March  26, 161f  (Wood,  F.  0.  i.  289). 

b  [Cowell's  '  Interpreter ?  was  first  From  a  paper  preserved  in  Tanner's 

published  in  1607  :  it  remained  for  a  MSS.,  vol.  Ixvii.  p.  25,  it  appears  that 

long  time  uncensured,  but  offence  the  edition  referred  to  in  the  text  was 

being  afterwards  taken  at  it  for  assert-  called  in  by  an  order  signed  by  Laud 

ing  the  unlimited  prerogative  of  the  and  others,  on  October  8,  1638.] 


them  to  Sir  John  Lambe ;  that  they  came  to  me  again,  and  Die 
a  third  time,  and  I  still  continued  my  reference ;  which  Sir  S< 
John  Lambe  slighting,  the  book  came  forth.    The  witnesses  to 
this  were  Hunt  and  Walyec,  if  I  mistook  not  their  names'1. 

1.  For  this  book  of  Dr.  Cowell's,  I  never  knew  of  it  till 
it  was  printed,  or  so  far  gone  on  in  printing  that  I  could  not 
stay  it :  and  the  witnesses  say,  '  it  was  in  a  close  house,  and 
without  licence  /  so  neither  I  nor  my  chaplains  could  take 
notice  of  it. 

236  2,  They  say,  they  informed  me  of  it,  but  name  no  time, 
but  only  the  year  1638.  But  they  confess  I  was  then  at 
Croydon  :  so  being  out  of  town  (as  were  almost  all  the  High 
Commissioners)  I  required  Sir  Jo.  Lambe,  who,  being  a  High 
Commissioner,  had  in  that  business  as  much  power  as  myself, 
to  look  to  it  carefully,  that  the  book  proceeded  not ;  or  if  it 
were  already  printed,  that  it  came  not  forth.  If  Sir  John 
slighted  his  own  duty  and  my  command  (as  themselves  say), 
he  is  living,  and  may  answer  for  himself;  and  I  hope  your 
Lps.  will  not  put  his  neglect  upon  my  account. 

3.  As  for  Hodgkinson,  he  was  never  my  printer J ;  but 
Badger  was  the  man  whom  I  employed,  as  is  well  known  to 
all  the  stationers.  Nor  was  Hodgkinson  ever  employed  by 
me  in  that  kind  or  any  other :  upon  just  complaint,  I  turned 
him  out  of  a  place,  but  never  put  him  into  any  :  and  there 
fore  those  terms  which  were  put  upon  me,  of  '  my  Hodgkin 
son/  and  '  my  Sir  Jo.  Lambe/  might  have  been  spared.  Sir 
John  was  indeed  Dean 2  of  the  Arches,  and  I  employed  him, 
as  other  Archbishops  did  the  Deans  which  were  in  their 
times ;  otherwise  no  way  mine :  and  Hodgkinson  had  his 
whole  dependence  on  Sir  Henry  Martin,  and  was  a  mere 
stranger  to  me.  t(  And  this  answer  I  gave  to  Mr.  Browne, 
when  he  summed  up  the  charge.  Nor  could  any  danger  be 
in  the  printing  of  that  book  to  mislead  any  man :  because  it 
was  generally  made  known  by  proclamation  that  it  was  a 

1  ['my  printer  ;'  originally  written  'printer,  as'] 

2  ['  indeed  Dean '  originally  written  '  indeed  my  Dean '] 

e  [Walye  was  Clerk  at  Stationers'  Journals  are  '  Hunscot  and  Wally.' 

Hall,  mentioned  several  times  by  Joseph  Hunscot  was  a  principal  printer 

Prynne  in  Cant.  Doom.]  of  the  day.] 

d  [The  names  as  given  in  the  Lords' 


Die            book   condemned,  and  in   such  particulars  :    but  for  other 
Secundo.     4.1,: XT_  _  t i_  r.-i  i  c  » 

X.  The  next  charge  was,  That  when  Dr.  Gill,  Schoolmaster  of 
Paul's  School,  in  London f,  was  warned  out  by  the  Mercers 
(to  the  care  of  which  Company  that  school  some  way  belongs8), 
upon  Dr.  Gill's  petition  to  the  King,  there  was  a  reference  to 
some  other  lords  and  myself  to  hear  the  business.  The 
charge  is,  that  at  this  hearing  I  should  say,  the  Mercers 
might  not  put  out  Dr.  Gill  without  his  Ordinary's  knowledge ; 
and  that  upon  mention  made  of  an  Act  of  Parliament,  I 
should  reply,  '  I  see  nothing  will  down  with  you  but  Acts  of 
Parliament ;  no  regard  at  all  of  the  Canons  of  the  Church :' 
and  that  I  should  further  add,  '  That  I  would  rescind  all  Acts 
which  were  against  the  Canons ;  and  that  I  hoped  shortly  to 
see  the  Canons  and  the  King's  prerogative  of  equal  force  with 
an  Act  of  Parliament.7 

To  this  I  answered ;  That  if  all  this  charge  were  true,  yet 
this  is  but  the  single  testimony  of  Samuel  Bland11,  an  officer 
belonging  to  the  Company  of  the  Mercers,  and  no  small 
stickler  against  Dr.  Gill,  whose  aged  reverend  father  had 
done  that  Company  great  service  in  that  school  for  many 
years  together *. 

The  reference,  he  grants,  was  to  me  and  others :  so  I 
neither  thrust  myself  into  the  business,  nor  was  alone  in  it. 

And  as  there  is  a  canon  of  this  Church,  That  no  man  may 
be  allowed  to  teach  school,  but  by  the  bishop  of  the  diocese  J ; 
so,  a  paritate  rationis,  it  (112)  stands  good,  they  may  not 
turn  him  out  without  the  said2  bishop's  knowledge  and  appro- 

1  ['Nor  could  .  .  .  useful.' on  opposite  page,]  2  [' said' interlined.] 

e  [The  book  afterwards  went  through  remitted.     He  was  removed  from  the 

several  editions;  in  1672,  1684,  1701  school  in  1640,  which  is  the  circum- 

(edited  by  White  Kennet),  and  1709  stance  referred  to  in  the  text] 

(Wood,  F.  0.  i.  289).]  *    [They  were  appointed  trustees. 

f  [It  appears  from   two  letters  of  See  Knight's  Life  of  Colet,  Append. 

Joseph    Mede,  quoted  by  Ant.  Wood  p.  335.] 

(Ath.  Ox.  iii.  43),  that  Alexander  Gill  h  [He  is  called  '  Matthew  Bland  '  in 

had  been  censured  in  the  Star-Cham-  Lords'  Journals.] 

ber,  in  Nov.  1628,  for  some  offensive  *  [Alexander  Gill,  the  elder,  a  scholar 

language  against  the  King,  and  sen-  of  Corpus  Christi  College,  Oxford,  suc- 

tenced  to  be  degraded,  and  to  suffer  ceeded  Rich.  Mulcaster   (Bishop  An- 

fme  and   corporal   punishment ;    but  drewes's   schoolmaster)    at   S.    Paul's 

that  on  the  intercession  of  Laud,  then  School,  in  1608,  and  died  Nov.    17, 

Bishop  of  London,  the  fine  was  miti-  1635.     (Wood,  Ath.  Ox.  ii.  597.)] 

gated,  and  the  corporal  punishment  i  Can.  77. 


bation.     And  'tis  expressed  in  another  canon,  f  That  if  any  Die 
schoolmaster  offend  in  any  of  the  premises'  (there  spoken  of)  Secundo< 
'  he  shall  be  admonished  by  his  Ordinary ;  and  if  he  do  not 
amend  upon  that  his  admonition,  he  shall  then  be  suspended 
237  from  teaching  k:'  which,  I  think,  makes  the  case  plain,  that 
the  Mercers  might  not  turn  out  Dr.  Gill  without  so  much  as 
the  knowledge  of  his  Bishop. 

And  for  the  words,  that  '  I  saw  nothing  would  down  with 
them  but  an  Act  of  Parliament,  and  that  no  regard  was  had 
to  the  Canons  ;'  I  humbly  conceive  there  was  no  offence  in 
the  words.  For  though '  the  superiority  by  far  in  this  kingdom 
belongs  to  the  Acts  of  Parliament,  yet  some  regard  doubtless 
is,  or  ought  to  be  had,  to  the  Canons  of  the  Church.  "  And 
if  nothing  will  down  with  men  but  Acts  of  Parliament,  the 
government  cannot  be  held  up  in  many  particulars." 

For  the  other  words,  God  forgive  this  witness ;  for  I  am 
well  assured,  I  neither  did  nor  could  speak  them.  For  is  it 
so  much  as  probable,  that  I  should  say,  '  I  would  rescind  all 
Acts  that  are  against  the  Canons  ? '  What  power  have  I,  or 
any  particular  man,  to  rescind  Acts  of  Parliament  ?  Nor  do 
I  think  any  man  that  knows  me,  will  believe  I  could  be  such 
a  fool  as  to  say,  that  '  I  hoped  shortly  to  see  the  Canons  and 
the  King's  prerogative  equal  to  Acts  of  Parliament;'  since 
I  have  lived  to  see  (and  that  often)  many  Canons  rejected,  as 
contrary  to  the  custom  of  the  place ;  as  in  choice  of  parish- 
clerks,  and  about 2  the  reparation  of  some  churches ;  and  the 
King's  prerogative  discussed  and  weighed  by  law :  neither  of 
which  hath  or  can  be  done  by  any  judges  to  an  Act  of  Par 
liament.  "That  there  is  malice  in  this  man  against  me3, 
appears  plainly ;  but  upon  what  'tis  grounded,  I  cannot  tell  ; 
unless  it  be  that  in  this  business  of  Dr.  Gill,  and  in  some 
other  about  placing  lecturers,  (which  in  some  cases  this  Com 
pany  of  the  Mercers  took  on  them  to  do l,)  I  opposing  it  so 
far  as  law  and  canon  would  give  me  leave,  crossed  some  way 
either  his  opinion  in  religion  or  his  purse-profit.  I  was, 
I  confess,  so  much  moved  at  the  unworthiness  of  this  man's 

1  ['though' interlined.]  2  ['  about'  in  marg.] 

3  ['  That .  .  .  me,'  on  opposite  page.  Originally  written,  '  What  the  malice 
of  this  man  is,'] 

k  Can.  79. 

1  [See  Accounts  of  Province  for  1633,  Works,  vol.  v.  p.  321.] 
LAUD.— VOL.  iv. 


Die  testimony,  that  I  thought  to  bind  this  sin  upon  his  soulra,  not 

to  be  forgiven  him  till  he  did  publicly  ask  me  forgiveness  for 
this  notorious  public  wrong  done  me.  But,  by  God's  good 
ness,  I  mastered  myself;  and  I  heartily  desire  God  to  give 
him  a  sense  of  this  sin  against  me  His  poor  servant,  and 
forgive  him."  And  if  these  words  could  possibly  escape  me, 
and  be  within  the  danger  of  that  statute ;  then  to  that 
statute,  which  requires  my  trial  within  six  months,  I  refer 

XI.  The  eleventh  charge  of  this  day  was  the  imprisonment  of 
Mr.  George  Wakern,  about  a  sermon  of  his,  preached  to 
prove  (as  he  said)  that  'tis  sin  to  obey  the  greatest  monarchs 
in  things  which  are1  against  the  command  of  God  :  that  I  had 
notes  of  his  sermons  for  four  or  five  years  together,  of  pur 
pose  to  entrap  him ;  that  I  told  his  Majesty  he  was  factious ; 
that  Sir  Dudly  Carltoii  °  writ  to  keep  him  close ;  that  in  this 
affliction  I  protested  to  do  him  kindness,  and  yet  did 

My  answer  was,  That  for  the  scope  of  his  sermon, '  to  obey 
God  rather  than  man/  no  man  doubts  but  it  ought  to  be  so, 
when  the  commands  are  opposite.  But  his  sermon  was 
viewed,  and  many  factious  passages,  and  of  high  nature,  found 
in  it.  And  yet  I  did  not  tell  the  King  he  was  factious,  but 
that  he  was  so  complained  of  to  me ;  and  this  was  openly  at 
the  Council-table. 

And  whereas  he  speaks  of  notes  of  his  sermons  for  divers  238 
years,  with  a  purpose  to  entrap  him  ;  all  that  he  says  is,  that 
'*  he  was  told  so/  but  produces  not  by  whom.  And  truly, 
I  never  had  any  such  notes,  nor  ever  used  any  such  art 
against  any  man  in  my  life.  For  his  commitment,  it  was 
done  by  the  Council-table  ;  and  after,  upon  some  carriage  of 
his  there,  by  the  Court  of  Star- Chamber,  not  by  me ;  nor 
can  that  be  imputed  to  me,  which  is  done  there  by  the  major 

1  ['  in  things  which  are'  in  margin  ] 

m  [Abp.  Sancroft  notes  this  passage,  Evangelist,  London,  April  29,  1614. 

as  though  he  considered  it  too  severe.]  In  1643,  he  was  one  of  the  Assembly 

n  f. '  Walker.'  of  Divines,  and  died   in  1651.     See 

[George  Walker,  termed  by  Wood  more  of  him  in  Abp  Laud's  Accounts 

(F.  0.  i.  399)  "a  learned  person,  an  of  his  Province   for  the  year  1635, 

excellent    logician,   orientalian,   and  (Works,  vol.  v.  p.  332.)] 

divine,"  was  admitted  to  S.  John  the  °  [Clerk  to  the  Council.] 


part,  and  I  having  no  negative.  And  if  Sir  Dudly  Carlton  Die 
writ  to  keep  him  close  at  his  brother's  house,  contrary  to  the 
Lds'.  order,  let  him  answer  it ;  and  if  he  supposes  that  was 
done  by  me,  why  is  not  Sir  Dudly  examined  to  try  that 
truth  ?  As  for  the  '  protestation '  which  he  says  I  made  to  his 
wife  and  his  brother,  that  I  complained  not  against  him;  it 
was  no  denial  of  my  complaint  made  against  him  at  the  first, 
that  I  heard  he  was  factious;  but  that  after  the  time,  in 
which  I  had  seen  the  full  testimony  of  grave  ministers  in 
London  that  he  was  not  factious,  I  made  no  complaint  after 
that,  but  did  my  best  to  free  him.  And  the  treason  in  these 
two  charges  is  against  the  Company  of  the  Mercers,  and 
Mr.  Walter. 

(113)  The  next  charge  was1,  that  Dr.  ManwaringP  having  XII. 
been  censured  by  the  Lords  in  Parliament  for  a  sermon  of 
his  against  the  liberty  and  propriety  of  the  subject,  was  yet 
after  this  preferred  by  me,  in  contempt  of  the  Parliament- 
censure,  both  to  the  deanery  of  Worcester (*  and  the  bishopric 
of  St.  David's1';  and  my  own  Diary  witnesses  that  I  was 
complained  of  in  Parliament  for  it ;  and  that  yet  after  this 
I  did  consecrate  him  bishop. 

1,  To  this  I  answered,  that  he  was  not  preferred  by  me  to 
either  of  these;  and  therefore,  that2  could  not  be  done  in 
contempt  of  the  Parliament-censure,  which  was  not  done  at 
all.     For  as  for  St.  David's,  'tis  confessed  Secretary  Winde- 
bank  signified  the  King's  pleasure,  not  I.     And  whereas  it 
was  added,  that  this  was  by  my  means ;  that  is  only  said,  but 
not  proved.     And-  for  Worcester,  there  is  no  proof  but  the 
Docket-book :  now,  my  Lords,  'tis  well  known  in  Court  that 
the  Docket  doth  but  signify  the  King's  pleasure  for  such  a 
bill  to  be  drawn ;  it  never  mentions  who  procured  the  pre 
ferment  :  so  that  the  Docket  can  be  no  proof  at  all  against 
me  ;  and  other  there's  none. 

2.  For  the  sermon,  'tis  true,  I  was  complained  of  in  Par 
liament,  that  I  had  been  the  cause  of  licensing  it  to  the 

1  ['  was,'  interlined.]  2  ['  that '  interlined.] 

p  [See  vol.  iii.  p.  207,  notes  h '.]  May,  seems  to  be  incorrect.] 
i  [Nominated  Oct.  28,  1633.     (Ry-  r  [The  Conge"  d'elire  was  issued  Jan. 
mer,  Feed.  VIII.  iv.  67.)  The  statement  4,  1635  ;  he  was  elected  Jan.  19  ;  con- 
in  Le  Neve  that  he  was  nominated  in  firmed  Feb.  26  ;  consecrated  Feb.  28.] 

G    2 


Die  press ;  and  'tis  as  true,  that  upon  that  complaint  I  was  nar~ 

>ecundo.  row]y  sifted  ;  and  an  honourable  Ld.  now  present,  and  the 
L.  Bishop  of  Lincoln9,  were  sent  to  Bishop  Mountain*,  who 
licensed  the  sermon,  to  examine  and  see  whether  any  warrant 
had  come  from  me,  or  any  message.  But  when  nothing 
appeared,  I  was  acquitted  in  open  Parliament;  "to  some 
body's  no  small  grief.  God  forgive  them,  and  their  malice 
against  me;  for,  to  my  knowledge,  my  ruin  was  then  thirsted 
for.  And,  as  I  answered  Mr.  Brown's  summary  charge,  when 
he  pressed  this  against  me,  could  this  have  been  proved,  I 
had  been  undone  long  since ;  the  work  had  not  been  now  to 
be  done1." 

That  he  was  after  consecrated  by  meu  is  true  likewise ; 
and  I  hope  'tis  not  expected  I  should  ruin  myself,  and  239 
fall  into  a  Pramunire,  by  refusing  the  King's  royal  assent v ; 
and  this  for  fear  lest  it  might  be  thought  I  procured  his 
preferment.  But  the  truth  is,  his  Majesty  commanded  me 
to  put  him  in  mind  of  him  when  preferments  fell,  and  I  did 
so  :  but  withal  I  told  his  Majesty2  of  his  censure,  and  that 
I  feared  ill  construction  would  be  made  of  it. 

To  this  it  was  replied,  That  I  might  have  refused  to  conse 
crate,  the  cause  why  being  sufficient,  and  justifiable  in  Par 
liament,  and  excepted  in  that  law.  "  But  how  sufficient 
soever  that  cause3  may  be  in  Parliament,  if  I  had  been  in  a 
Praemunire  therewhile,  and  lost  my  liberty  and  all  that  I  had 
beside,  for  disobeying  the  royal  assent,  I  believe  I  should 
have  had  but  cold  comfort  when  the  next  Parliament  had 
been  summoned  ;  no  exception  against  the  man  being  known 
to  me,  either  for  life  or  learning,  but  only  this  censure :  nor 
is  there  any  exception  which  the  Archbishop  is  by  that  law 
allowed  to  make,  if  my  book  be  truly  printed4." 
XIII.  Then  followed  the  charge  of  Dr.  Heylin's  book  against  Mr. 
Burton x;  out  of  which  it  was  urged,  that  an  unlimited  power 

charge .  .  .  done.'  on  opposite  page.] 

told  his  Majesty'  originally  written  'put  his  Majesty  in  mind'] 

that  cause'  originally  written  '  that  cause,  or  any  '] 

any  exception  .  .  .  printed.'  on  opposite  page.] 

8  [John  Williams.!  p.  226.] 

1  [George  Mountain,  or  Montaigne,          v  25  lien.  VIII.  c.  20,  §  ult. 
then  Bishop  of  London.]  *  [Henry   Barton,   of    S.Matthew, 

u  [See  Diary,  Feb.  28, 1635,  vol.  iii.  Friday-street.] 


was  pressed  very  far;  and  out  of  p.  40  ?,  ' that  a  way  was  Die 
found  to  make  the  subject  free,  and  the  king  a  subject;'  that  Sccundo- 
this  man  was  preferred  by  me ;  that  Dr.  Heylin  confessed  to 
a  Committee  that  I  commanded  him  to  answer  Mr.  Burton's 
book ;  and  that  my  chaplain,  Dr.  Braye z,  licensed  it. 

I  answered  as  follows  : — I  did  not  prefer  Dr.  Heylin  to  the 
King's  service ;  it  was  the  E.  of  Danby,  who  had  taken 
honourable  care  of  him  before  in  the  University.  His  pre 
ferments  I  did  not  procure;  for  it  appears  by  what  hath  been 
urged  against  me,,  that  the  Ld.  Viscount  Dorchester a  pro 
cured  him  his  parsonage b,  and  Mr.  Secretary  Cokec  his 
prebend  in  Westminster  d. 

For  his  answer  to  the  Committee,  that  I  commanded  him 
to  write  against  Burton,  it  was  an  ingenuous  and  a  true 
answer,  and  became  him  and  his  calling  well ;  for  I  did  so. 
"  And  neither  I  in  commanding,  nor  he  in  obeying,  did  other 
than  what  we  had  good  precedent  for  in  the  primitive  Church 
of  Christ.  For  when  some  monks  had  troubled  the  Church  at 
Carthage1,  but  not  with  half  that  danger  which  Mr.  Burton's 
book  threatened  to  this,  Aurelius,  then  bishop,  commanded 
St.  Aug.  to  write  against  it;  and  he  did  soe.  His  words  are, 
'  Aurelius  scribere  jussit,  et  feci/  3  But  though  I  did,  as  by 
my  place  I  might,  command  him  to  write  and  answer,  yet  I 
did  neither  command  nor  advise  him  to  insert  anything  un 
sound  or  unfit.  If  any  such  thing  be  found  in  it,  he  must 
answer  for  himself,  and  the  licenser  for  himself.  For  as  for 

1  ['at  Carthage/  in  marg.     Originally  written,  '  at  Hippo,'  also  in  marg.] 

y    Heylin    cont.    Burton,    [i.e.  'A  "•  [Dudley   Carlcton,    created    Vis- 

briefe  and  moderate   Answer  to  the  count,  Dorchester  July  25,  1628.] 

seditious   and  scandalous   Challenges  h  [This  was  to  the  Rectory  of  He- 

of    Henry    Burton,    late    of   Friday-  mingford,  in  Hunts.     The  patronage 

streete.'l  cap.  ii.  p.  40.  [Lond.  1637.]  was  disputed  by  Williams,  Bp.  of  Lin- 

z  [William   Bray  was  originally  of  coin,  and   Heylin  did  not  enjoy  the 

the  Puritan  party.    He  was  afterwards  benefice.     See  Life,  prefixed  to  Iley- 

patronized  by   Laud,  and  appointed  lin's  Historical  Tracts.] 

Rector    of    S.  Ethelburga,    May    5,  c  [Sir  John  Coke  ] 

1632;  Preb.  of  Mapesbury,  in  S.  Paul's  d  [He  was  appointed  to  the  sixth 

Ch.,  June  12,  1632  ;  Vicar  of  S.  Mar-  stall,  vacant  by  the  death  of  George 

tin's-in-the-Fields, March  2, 1632;  and  Darrell,  Nov.  4,  1631,  and  installed 

Prebendary  of  the  first  stall  in  Can-  Nov.  6.    (Rymer,  Feed.  VIII.  iii.  224, 

terbury.     He   was    censured  by   the  and  Le  IS  eve.)] 

Parliament    for    licensing    Pockling-  e  [S.]  Aug.  [lib.]  ii.  Retract,  c.  21. 

ton's  Sermons,  and  enjoined  to  preach  [Op.,  torn.  i.  col.  97.  C.    The  work  re- 

a  recantation  sermon  at  S.  Margaret's,  ferred  to  is  the  treatise  "  De  Opere 

Westminster.]  Monachorum."] 


Die  licensing  of  books,  I  held  the  same  course  which  all  my  prede- 

Secundo.  111  11-  •    ± 

cessors  had  done ;  and  when  any  chaplain  came  new  into  my 

house,  I  gave  him  a  strict  charge  in  that  particular.  And  in  all 
my  predecessors'  times,  the  chaplains  suffered  for  faults  com 
mitted,  and  not  their  lords  ;  though  now  all  is  heaped  on  me. 

"As  for  the  particular  words  urged  out  of  Dr.  Heylin's  book, 
p.  40,  there  is  neither  expression  by  them,  nor  intention  in 
them,  against  either  the  law  or  any  lawful  proceedings ;  but 
they  are  directed  to  Mr.  Burton  and  his  doctrine  only.  The 
words  are, — '  You  have  found  out  a  way '  (not  the  law,  but 
you,  Mr.  Burton)  '  to  make  the  subject  free,  and  the  King  a  240 
subject :'  whereas,  it  would  well  have  beseemed  Mr.  Burton 
to  have  carried  his  pen  even,  at  the  least,  and  left  the  King 
his  freedom,  as  well  as  the  subject  his  V 

XIV.  (114)  From  this  they  proceeded  to  another  charge,  which 
was,  that  I  preferred  chaplains  to  be  about  the  King  and  the 
Prince,  which  were  disaffected  to  the  public  welfare  of  the 
kingdom.  The  instance  was  in  Dr.  Dove l ;  and  a  passage  read 
out  of  his  book  against  Mr.  Burton ;  and  it  was  added,  that 
the  declaring  of  such  disaffection  was  the  best  inducement  or 
bribe  to  procure  them  preferment. 

To  this  I  then  said,  and  'tis  true,  I  did  never  knowingly 
prefer  any  chaplain  to  the  King  or  Prince,  that  was  ill-affected 
to  the  public.  And  for  Dr.  Dove,  if  he  uttered  by  tongue  or 
by  pen  any  Such  wild  speech  concerning  any  members  of  the 
honourable  House  of  Commons,  as  is  urged,  thereby  to  show 
his  disaffection  to  the  public2,  he  is  living,  and  I  humbly 
desire  he  may  answer  it.  But  whereas  it  was  said,  '  that  this 
was  the  best  inducement  or  bribe  to  get  preferment/  this 
might  have  been  spared,  had  it  so  pleased  the  gentleman 
which  spake  it :  but  I  know  my  condition,  and  where  I  am, 
and  will  not  lose  my  patience  for  language. 

1  ['-As  for  the  particular  .  .  .  his.'  on  opposite  page.] 

2  ['  thereby  .  .  .  public,'  in  margin.] 

'[Christopher  Dowe,  the  person  of  a  libellous  pamphlet  of  Henry  Bur- 
here  referred  to,  was  of  Christ's  Col-  ton's,  intituled,  '  An  Apologie  of  an 
lege,  Cambridge,  incorporated  at  Ox-  Appeal,'  &c.  Lond.  1637."  He  was 
ford  July  10,  1621.  (Wood,  F.  0.  i.  appointed  Hector  of  All  Saints,  Has- 
399.)  The  title  of  his  book  was,  tings,  May  4, 1636.  (Bymer,  Feed.  IX. 
"  Innovations  unjustly  charged  upon  ii.  87.)  His  name  is  not  found  in 
the  present  Church  and  State ;  or,  an  Walker's  Sufferings,  so  that  he  pro- 
Answer  to  the  most  material  passages  bably  died  shortly  after  this  time.] 


*  And  whereas  His  urged,  that  after  this  he  was  named  by  Die 
me  to  be  a  chaplain  to  the  Prince  his  highness,  the  thing  was  Secundo- 
thus.  His  Majesty  had  suit  made  to  him,  that  the  Prince 
might  have  sermons  in  his  own  chapel  for  his  family.  Here 
upon  his  Majesty,  approving  the  motion,  commanded  me  to 
think  upon  the  names  of  some  fit  men  for  that  service.  I  did 
so :  but  before  anything  was  done,  I  acquainted  the  Right 
Honourable  the  Ld.  Chamberlain,  that  then  was,  with  it. 
My  Ld.  knew  most  of  the  men,  and  approved  the  note,  and 
delivered  it  to  his  secretary,  Mr.  Oldsworth,  to  swear  them. 
This  was  the  fact ;  and  at  this  time,  when  I  put  Dr.  Dove's 
name  into  the  list,  I  did  not  know  of  any  such  passage  in  his 
book,  nor,  indeed,  ever  heard  of  it  till  now.  For  I  had  not 
read  his  book,  but  here  and  there  by  snatches. 

I  am  now  come  (and  'tis  time)  to  the  last  particular  of  this  XV. 
day;  and  this  charge  was,  the  giving  of  subsidies  to  the 
King  in  the  Convocation,  without  consent  in  Parliament; 
that  the  penalties  for  not  paying  were  strict,  and  without 
appeal,  as  appears  in  the  Act&;  where  it  is  further  said,  that 
f  we  do  this  according  to  the  duty  which  by  Scripture  we  are 
bound  unto ;'  which  reflects  upon  the  liberties  of  Parliaments 
in  that  behalf.  But  it  ^Yas  added,  they  would  not  meddle 
now  with  the  late  Canons  for  anything  else,  till  they  came  to 
their  due  place. 

1.  My  answer  to  thte  was:  That  this  was1  not  my  single 
act,  but  the  act  of  the  whole  Convocation,  and  could  not  be 
appliable  to  me  only. 

2.  That  this  grant  was  no  other,  nor  in  any  other  way, 
mutatis  mutandis,  than  was  granted  to  Queen  Elizabeth  in 
Archbishop  Whitgift's  time.     This   grant  was  also  put  in 
execution,   as  appeared  by  the  originals  which  we  followed. 
These  originals  (among  many  other  records)  were  commanded 

241  away  by  the  honourable  House  of  Commons,  and  where  they 
now  are  I  know  not;  but  for  want  of  them,  my  defence 
cannot  be  so  full. 

3.  For  the  circumstances,  as  '  that  the  penalties  are  without 
appeal/  and  the  like,  'tis  usual  in  all  such  grants.    And  '  that 

1  ['was'  interlined.] 

[See  a  copy  of  the  Act  in  Nalson's  Collection,  vol.  i.  pp.  533—537.] 


Die  we  did  it  according  to  our  duty  and  the  rules  of  Scripture/ 

ecundo.  we  conceive(j  was  a  fitting  expression  for  ourselves,  and  men 
of  our  calling ],  without  giving  law  to  others,  or  any  intention 
to  violate  the  law  in  the  least.  For  thus,  I  humbly  conceive, 
lies  the  mutual  relation  between  the  King  and  his  people,  by 
rules  of  conscience.  The  subjects  are  to  supply  a  full  and 
honourable  maintenance  to  the  King  :  and  the  King  (when  ne 
cessities  call  upon  him)  is  to  ask  of  his  people  in  such  a  way  as 
is,  perpacta,  by  law  and  covenant  agreed  upon  between  them, 
which  in  this  kingdom  is  by  Parliament ;  yet  the  clergy  ever 
granting  their  own  at  all  times.  And  that  this  was  my  judg 
ment  long  before  this,  appears  by  a  sermon  of  mine,  appointed 
to  be  preached  at  the  opening  of  the  Parliament,  in  the  year 
1625 h.  My  words  are, these : — 'If  you  would  have  indeed  a 
flourishing  both  State  and  Church,  the  King  must  trust  and 
endear  his  people,  and  the  people  must  honour,  obey,  and 
support  their  King/  &c.  This,  I  hope,  is  far  enough  from 
derogating  from  any  law;  and  if  I  should  privately  have 
spoken  anything  to  him  contrary  to  this,  which  I  had  both 
preached  and  printed,  how  could  his  Majesty  have  trusted  me 
in  anything  ? 

1  ['  and  men  of  our  calling/  in  marg.] 

My  sermon  in  Psal.  Ixxv.  2, 3,  p,  14.  [Works,  vol.  i.  p.  99.] 


242  CAP.  XXIV. 

THIS  brought  this  tedious  day  to  an  end.  And  I x  had  an  Die  Tertio. 
order  the  same  day  to  appear  again  on  Saturday,  March  16, 
1643,  with  a  note  also  from  the  Committee  which  were  to 
charge  me,  that  they  meant  then  to  proceed  upon  part  of  the 
second  additional  Article,  (115)  and  upon  the  third  original, 
and  the  third  and  fifth  additional  Articles.  The  second 
additional  Article  is  written  down  before ;  and  here  follow 
the  rest  now  mentioned,  to  be  next  proceeded  upon. 

3.  The  third  original  is, — He  hath  by  letters,  messages, 
threats,  promises,  and  divers  other  ivays,  to  judges  and 
other  ministers  of  justice,  interrupted  and  perverted, 
and  at  other  times,  by  the  means  aforesaid,  hath  endea 
voured  to  interrupt  and  pervert  the  course  of  justice  in  his 
Majesty's  courts  at  Westminster,  and  other  courts,  to 
the  subversion  of  the  laws  of  this  kingdom;  whereby 
sundry  of  his  Majesty's  subjects  have  been  stopped  in 
their  just  suits,  and  deprived  of  their  lawful  rights,  and 
subjected  to  his  tyrannical  will,  to  their  utter  ruin  and 

The  third  and  fifth  additional  follow  :  — 

3.  That  the  said  Archbishop,  to  advance  the  Canons  of  the 
Church  and  power  ecclesiastical  above  the  law  of  the  land, 
and  to  pervert  and  hinder  the  course  of  justice,  hath  at 
divers  times  within  the  said  time,  by  his  letters,  and  other 
undue  means  and  solicitations  used  to  judges,  opposed  and 
stopped  the  granting  of  his  Majesty's  writs  of2  prohibi 
tion,  where  the  same  ought  to  have  been  granted  for  stay 
of  proceedings  in  the  ecclesiastical  court,  whereby  justice 
hath  been  delayed  and  hindered,  and  the  judges  diverted 
from  doing  their  duties. 

1  [' I'  interlined.]  2  [' his  Majesty's  writs  of  in  margin.] 


Die  Tertio.  5.  That  the  said  Archbishop,  about  eight  years  last  past, 
being  then  also  a  privy-counsellor  to  his  Majesty,  for  the 
end  and  purpose  aforesaid,  caused  Sir  John  Corbet,  of 
Stoke,  in  the  county  of  Salop,  Baronet,  then  a  justice  of 
peace  of  the  said  county l,  to  be  committed  to  the  prison 
of  the  Fleet,  where  he  continued  prisoner  for  the  space  of 
half  a  year  or  more,  for  no  other  cause  but  for  calling  for 
the  Petition  of  Right,  and  causing  it  to  be  read  at  the 
sessions  of  the  peace  for  that  county,  upon  a  just  and 
necessary  occasion.  And  during  the  time  of  his  said 
imprisonment,  the  said  Archbishop,  without  any  colour  of 
right,  by  a  writing  under  the  seal  of  his  archbishopric, 
granted  away  parcel  of  the  glebe-land  of  the  church  oj 
Adder  ly  in  the  said  county,  whereof  the  said  Sir  Jo. 
Corbet  was  then  patron,  unto  Robert,  Viscount  Kilmurry, 
without  the  consent  of  the  said  Sir  John,  or  the  then 
incumbent  of  the  said  church ;  which  said  Viscount  Kil 
murry  built  a  chapel  upon  the  said  parcel  of  glebe-land, 
to  the  great  prejudice  of  the  said  Sir  John  Corbet,  which 
hath  caused  great  suits  and  dissensions*  between  them. 
And  whereas  the  said  Sir  John  Corbet  had  a  judgment  #43 
against  Sir  James  Stonehouse,  Knight,  in  an  action2  of 
waste  in  his  Majesty's  Court  of  Common  Pleas  at  West 
minster,  which  was  afterwards  affirmed  in  a  writ  of  error 
in  the  King's  Bench,  and  execution  thereupon  awarded; 
yet  the  said  Sir  John,  by  means  of  the  said  Archbishop, 
could  not  have  the  effect  thereof,  but  was  committed  to 
prison  by  the  said  Archbishop  and  others  at  the  Council- 
table,  until  he  had  submitted  himself  unto  the  order  of 
the  said  Table,  whereby  he  lost  the  benefit  of  the  said 
judgment  and  execution. 


Saturday,        In  the  interim,  between  the  13th  and  this  16th  of  March, 
I64f.    '     upon  some  strict  charge  to  look  to  the  Tower,  my  solicitor 

1  [<  of  the  said  county,'  in  margin.] 

2  [The  word  looks  like  '  Etion/  probably  an  abbreviation  for  'Ejection.'] 

contentions '  Kushw. 


was  not  suffered  to  come  in  to  me.     Whereupon,  so  soon  as  Die  Tertio. 
I  was  settled  at  the  bar,  before  the  evidence  began  to  be 
opened,  I  spake  to  the  Lords  as  follows  : — 

te  My  Lds.,  I  stand  not  here  to  complain  of  anything,  or 
any  man,  but  only  am  enforced  to  acquaint  your  Lps.  with 
my  sad  condition.  Your  Lps.  have  appointed  my  secretary 
to  be  my  solici(116)tor,  and  given  him  leave  to  assist  me  in 
the  turning  of  my  papers,  and  to  warn  in  such  witnesses,  and 
to  fetch  me  the  copies  of  such  records,  as  I  shall  have  occasion 
to  use.  And  I  humbly  desire  your  Lps.  to  consider,  that 
myself  being  imprisoned,  and  so  utterly  disenabled  to  do 
these  things  myself,  it  will  be  absolutely  impossible  for  me  to 
make  any  defence,  if  my  solicitor  be  denied  to  come  to  me, 
as  now  he  is."  This  was  granted,  and  the  hearing  adjourned 
till  Monday  following b ;  and  I  humbly  thanked  their  Lord 
ships  for  it. 

b  Here  the  relation  is  imperfect,  might  come  to  him,  and  in  the  mean- 
It  seems  he  moved  that  his  solicitor  time  the  hearing  put  off. — W.  S.  A.C. 


CAP.  XXV.  244 


Die  Tertio  THE  fourth  day  of  my  hearing  was  Monday,,  March  18,  and 
Marches  was  on^  my  answer  to  tue  third  day's  charge,  and  the  only 
Monday,  time  in  which  I  was  not  put  to  answer  the  same  day1.  The 
first2  charge  of  this  day3  was  about  S.  Paul's.  And  first  out 
of  my  Diary,  (where  I  confess  it  one  of  my  projects  to  repair 
that  ancient  fabric8;)  and  three  strict  orders  of  the  Lords  of 
the  Council  for  the  demolishing  of  the  houses  built  about 
that  church.  One4  was  Novemb.  21, 1634.  The  demolishing 
of  the  houses  commanded  by  this  before  Jan.  6  for  one,  and 
for  the  rest  by  after  midsummer5.  Another  was  Mar.  26, 
1631  ;  a  committee,  with  power  to  compound  with  the 
tenants,  and  with  order  to  pull  down  if  they  would  not  com 
pound6.  The  third  was  Mar.  2,  1631,  which  gives  power  to 
the  sheriffs  to  pull  down,  if  obedience  be  not  yielded 7. 

To  this  I  confess  I  did,  when  I  came  first  to  be  Bishop  of 
London,  project  the  repair  of  that  ancient  and  famous 
cathedral  of  S.  Paul,  ready  to  sink  into  its  own  ruins.  And 
to  this  I  held  myself  bound  in  general,  as  bishop  of  the  place, 

1  ("'  The  fourth  .  .  .  same  day.'     This  sentence  is  written  in  margin  of  p.  115 
of  MS.] 

2  [After  the  words,  'then  the  business  proceeded/  which  then  follow  in  the 
MS.,  the  following  passage  is  erased,  — '  The  fii'st  charge  of  these  two  days  (for 
in  my  notes  I  have  slipped  Avhere  the  fourth  day's  charge  began,  and  therefore 
I  will  go  on  with  the  charge  of  both  these  days  together,  because  to  the  utter 
most  of  my  power  I  will  not  be  found  faulty  so  much  as  in  a  circumstance) — 
I  say  the  first,'  &c.  (as  in  text.)] 

3  ['  of  this  day'  in  margin.]  *  ['  One'  originally  written  '  The  first '] 

5  [The  following  is  the  account  given  in  a  passage  now  erased  : — '  The  next 
was  Mar.  2  ;  a  committee  ordered  to  compound  with  the  several  tenants,  and 
they  not  to  have  the  materials,  unless  on  the  day  appointed.  The  third  was  Mar. 
26,  1631,  directed  to  the  sheriffs,  to  demolish  the  houses  of  such  as  would  not 
obey,  nor  take  composition  by  the  days  appointed.'] 

6  ['  a  committee  .  .  .  compound.'  on  opposite  page.] 

7  ['  gives  power  .  .  .  yielded.' on  opposite  page.] 

a  [See  vol.  Hi.  p.  253.] 


and  in  particular  for  the  body  of  the  church,  the  repair  of  Die  Tertio 
which  is  by  the  local  statutes  laid  upon  the  bishop.     And  e 
the  bishop  was  well  able  to  do  it,  while  he  enjoyed  those 
lands  which  he  had  when  that  burthen  was  laid  upon  him. 
"  But  what  sacrilegious  hands    despoiled   that  bishopric  of 
them,  'tis  to1  no  purpose  to  tellV 

And  truly,  my  Lds.,  since  I  am  in  this  present  condition, 
I  humbly  and  heartily  thank  God,  that  S.  Paul's  comes  into 
my  sufferings,  and  that  God  is  pleased  to  think  me  worthy 
to  suffer  either  for  it  or  with  it  any  way ;  though  I  confess 
I  little  thought  to  meet  that  here,  or,  as  a  charge,  anywhere 
else.  And  so  God  be  pleased  (as  I  hope  in  Christ  He  will)  to 
pardon  my  other  sins,  I  hope  I  shall  be  able  (human  frailties 
always  set  aside)  to  give  an  easy  account  for  this.  But 
whereas  I  said,  '  the  repair  of  St.  Paul's  was  a  strange  piece  of 
treason  ;'  and  they  presently  replied,  that  they  did  not  charge 
the  repair  upon  me,  but  the  l  manner  of  doing  it,  by  demo 
lishing  of  men's  houses ;'  to  that  I  answered  as  follows ; 
with  this  first,  that  the  work  hath  cost  me  above  one  thousand 
and  two  hundred  pounds  out  of  my  own  purse,  besides  all  my 
care  and  pains,  and  now  this  heavy  charge  to  boot ;  no  one 
man  offering  to  prove,  that  I  have  misspent,  or  diverted  to 
other  use,  any  one  penny  given  to  that  work,  or  that  I  have 
done  anything  about  it  without  the  knowledge,  approbation, 
and  order  of  his  Majesty,  or  the  Lords  of  the  Council,  or 

To  the  particulars  then.  For  the  three  orders  taken  out 
of  the  Council-books,  I  shall  not  need  to  repeat  them.  But 
what  is  the  mystery,  that  these  orders  are  reckoned  backward, 
the  last  first  ?  Is  it  to  aggravate,  as  if  it  rose  by  steps  ? 
245  That  cannot  well  be ;  because  the  first  order  is  the  sourest,  if 
I  conceive  it  right.  Besides,  here  was  real  composition 
allotted  for  them,  and  that  by  a  Committee  named  by  the 
Lords,  not  by  me.  And  I  think  it  was  very  real ;  for  it  cost 
eight  or  nine  thousand  pounds  (as  appears  upon  the  accounts0) 

1  ['  to '  interlined.] 

b  [Bp.  Eidley  had  exchanged  many  benefit  of  the  See.] 

of  the  lands  of  the  See  of  London  with  c  [A  statement  of  the  receipts  and 

Edw.  VI.  (Strype,   Memorials,  II.  i.  payments  is  given   in   Dugdale's  S. 

339  ;)  but  Strype  says  (p.  341),  to  the  Paul's.] 


Die  Tertio  merely  to  take  down  the  houses  (which  had  no  right  to  stand 
there),  before  we  could  come  at  the  church  to  repair  it. 

And  if  anything  should  be  amiss  in  any  of  these  (which  is 
more  than  I  either  know  or  believe) ;  they  were  the  Council's 
orders,  not  mine.  And  shall  that  be  urged  as  treason  against 
me,  which  is  not  imputed  to  them  so  much  as  a  misde 
meanour  ?  Besides,  the  Lords  of  the  Council  are  in  the  ancient 
constitution  of  this  kingdom  one  body;  and  whatsoever  the 
major  part  of  them  concludes,  is  reputed  the  act  of  the  whole, 
not  any  one  man's.  And  this  I  must  often  inculcate,  because 
I  see  such  public  acts  like  to  be  heaped  upon  my  particular. 

1.  The  first  witness  about  this  business  of  St.  Paul's  is 
Mich.  Burton  !,  and  'tis  charged  that  his  house  was  pulled 
down  in  King  (117)  James's  time;  that  he  was  promised 
relief,  but  had  none :  that  hereupon  he  got  a  reference  from 
his  Majesty  that  now  is,  and  came  with  it  to  the  Council, 
and  was  referred  to  the  Committee.  That  Sir  Hen.  Martin 
told  him,  that  the  Archbishop  was  his  hindrance.  That  he 
resorted  to  me,  and  that  I  bid  him  go  to  King  James  for  his 

To  this  my  answer  was,  That  this  house,  which  he  says  was 
his,  was  (as  is  confessed  by  himself)  taken  down  in  King 
James's  time,  when  an  attempt  was  made  about  the  repair  of 
this  cathedral,  but  nothing  done  2.  If  he  desired  satisfaction, 
he  was  to  seek  it  of  them  who  took  down  his  house,  not  of 
me.  If  his  Majesty  that  now  is  gave  him  a  reference,  he  was 
by  the  Lords  of  the  Council,  or  by  me  (if  to  me  it  were 
referred),  to  be  sent  to  the  Sub-Committee,  because  satisfac 
tion  for  each  house  was  to  be  ordered  by  them.  Nor  had 
I  any  reason  to  take  it  on  my  care,  which  was  done  so  long 
before.  He  says,  that  Sir  H.  Martin  told  him,  that  I  hindered 
him :  but  that's  no  proof  that  Sir  H.  Martin  told  him  so ; 
for  'tis  but  his  report  of  Sir  H.  Martin's  speech :  and  I  hope, 
Sir  Henry  neither  did,  nor  would  do  me  such  apparent  wrong. 
He  was  the  third  man  to  whom  I  brake  my  intentions  touch 
ing  the  repair,  and  the  difficulties  which  I  foresaw  I  was  to 
meet  with  :  and  he  gave  me  all  encouragement.  And  it  may 
be,  when  nothing  would  satisfy  the  eager  old  man,  I  might 

1  [After  '  Burton,'  '  single  and  in '  erased.] 

2  ["'when  .  .  .  done.'  in  margin.] 


bid  him  go  to  King  James  for  recompense ;  but  'tis  more  than  Die  Tertlo 
I  remember  if  I  did  so.  And  this  man  is  single,  and  in  his  et  ^uarto< 
own  case ;  and  where  lies  the  treason  that  is  in  it  ? 

Besides,  least  consideration  was  clue  to  this  house  :  for,  not 
many  years  before  the  demolishing  of  it,  it  was  built  at  the 
west  end  of  St.  Paul's  for  a  lottery ;  (it  was  said  to  be  the 
house  of  one  Wheatly ;)  and  after  the  lottery  ended,  finished 
up  into  a  dwelling-house,  to  the  great  annoyance  of  that 
church  :  the  bishop,  and  dean,  and  chapter  being  asleep  while 
it  was  done. 

2.  The  next  charge  about  St.  Paul's  was  witnessed  by  Mary 
246  Berry d,  that  her  husband  was  fain  to  set  up  his  trade  else 
where,   and  that  every  man  reported,  the  Bishop  was  the 
cause  of  it. 

Her  husband  was  forced  by  this  remove  to  set  up  his  trade 
elsewhere ;  so  she  says :  and  perhaps  in  a  better  place,  and 
with  satisfaction  sufficient  to  make  him  a  better  stock : 
where's  the  wrong  ?  Beside,  she  is  single,  and  in  her  own 
cause,  and  no  proof,  but  that  every  man  reported  the  Bishop 
was  the  means  to  remove  him.  And  it  is  observable,  that  in 
King  James  his  time,  when  the  commission  issued  out  for 
the  demolishing  of  these  very  houses,  the  work  was  highly 
applauded;  and  yet  no  care  taken  for  satisfaction  of  any 
private  man's  interest :  now  that  great  care  hath  been  taken, 
and  great  sums  of  money  expended  about  it,  yet  I  must  be  a 
traitor,  and  no  less,  for  doing  it.  "  This  makes  me  think, 
some  party  of  men  were  heartily  angry  at  the  repair  itself; 
though  for  very  shame  it  be  turned  off  upon  the  demolishing 
of  the  houses." 

3.  GDhe  next  that  came  in,  was  Tho.  Wheeler :  he  says  that 
his  house  was  pulled  down  by  the  Committee,  by  my  direc 
tion,  above  eleven  years  ago :  and  that  word  was  brought  him 
of  it. 

His  house  was  pulled  down ;  but  himself  confesses  it  was 
by  the  Committee.  It  was,  he  says,  above  eleven  years  ago, 
and  the  time  limited  in  that  Article  is  six  e  years.  He  says, 
that  word  was  brought  him,  that  I  was  the  cause,  or  gave  the 
direction.  Word  was  brought  him ;  but  he  names  not  by 

d  ['  Bury/  Lords'  Journals.] 

e  'sixteen,'  vide.     [But  see  Article  ii.  as  given  above,  p.  69.] 


Die  Tertio  whom,  nor  from  whom  ] ;  so  all  this  proof  is  a  single  hearsay 
of  he  knows  not  whom :  whereas  I  had  the  Broad  Seal  of 
England  for  all  that  was  done.  It  was  replied  here,  That  for 
demolishing  of  these  houses  the  King's  Commission f  was  no 
full  and  legal  warrant ;  I  should  have  procured  authority 
from  Parliament.  I  replied  to  this  interruption,  That  houses 
more  remote  from  the  church  of  St.  Paul's  were  pulled  down 
by  the  King's  Commission  only  in  K.  Ed.  III.  time ;  and 
humbly  desired  a  salvo  might  be  entered  for  me,  till  I  might 
bring  the  record  %  •  which  was  granted. 

4.  The  last  instance  for  this  charge  of  St.  PauFs,  was  the 
house  of  W. Wakern  h ;  who  witnessed,  that  he  had  a  hundred 
pound  recompense  for  his  house ;  but  then  was  after  fined  in 
the  High-Commission  Court  100/.  for  profanation,  of  which 
he  paid  30/. 

To  this  I  gave  this  answer ;  That  his  charge  is  true  ;  and 
that  after  he  had  received  100/.  composition,  the  cry  of  the 
profanation  brought  him  into  the  High-Commission.  It  was 
thus  :  the  skulls  of  dead  men  (perhaps  better  than  himself) 
were  tumbled  out  of  their  graves  into  his  draught,  and  part 
of  the  foundation  of  the  church  (as  appeared  in  the  taking 
down  of  his  house)  was  broken,  or  pared  away,  to  make  room 
for  the  uncleanness  to  pass  into  the  vault :  arid  surely  were 
I  to  sit  again  in  the  High-Commission,  I  should  give  my  vote 
to  censure  this  profa(118)nation.  But  himself  confesses,  he 
paid  but  thirty  pound  of  it,  which  was  too  little  for  such  an 
offence.  And  besides,  my  Lords,  this  was  the  act  of  the 
High- Commission,  and  cannot  be  charged  singly  upon  me. 

And  I  cannot  forbear  to  add  thus  much  more,  That  the  247 
bishop,  and  dean,  and  chapter,  whoever  they  were,  did  ill  to 
give  way  to  these  buildings,  and  to  increase  their  rents  by  a 
sacrilegious  revenue  :  no  law  that  I  know  giving  way  to  build 
upon  consecrated  ground,  as  that  churchyard  is.     But  how- 

-1  ['  nor  from  whom ;'  in  margin.] 

f  [See  the  Special  Commission  for  perhaps,  it  will  not  be  necessary  to 

repairing     S.  Paul's     Cathedral,    in  print  the  whole  patent ;  but  if  it  be, 

Rymer,  Feed.  VIII.  iii.  172  seq.]  I  have  a  copy  of  it. — W.  S.  A.  C. 

e  See  this  record  twice  referred  to  This  came  not  to  my  hands. — H.W. 

afterwards.     In   the  latter  place  the  h  ['  Wathon,'  Lords'  Journals.] 
useful  words  of  it  are  recited.  So  that, 


soever,  the  present l  tenants  being  not  in  dolo,  I  ever  thought  Die  Tertio 
fit  they  should  have  recompense  for  their  estates,  and  they  et  Quarto- 
had  it. 

The  next  charge  was  about  the  shops  of  the  Goldsmiths  II. 
in  Cheapside  and  Lombard-street.  An  order  was  made  at 
the  Council-table,  Novemb.  12,  1634,  That  within  six  months 
the  Goldsmiths  should  provide  themselves  shops  there,  and 
nowhere  else,  till  all  those  shops  were  furnished  :  and  this 
under  a  penalty,  and  to  give  bond. 

These  two  were  the  ancient  places  for  Goldsmiths  only* 
time  out  of  mind :  and  it  was  thought  fit  by  the  Lords,  for 
the  beauty  of  the  place,  and  the  honour  of  the  city,  to  have 
these  places  furnished  as  they  were  wont,  and  not  to  have 
other  trades  mixed  among  them.  Beside,  it  concerned  all 
men's  safety :  for  if  any  plate  were  stolen,  the  inquiry  after 
it  might  be  made  with  more  ease  and  speed :  whereas  if  the 
goldsmiths  might  dwell  here  and  there,  and  keep  their  shops 
in  every  by-place  of  the  city,  stolen  plate  might  easily  be 
made  off,  and  never  heard  of.  But  howsoever,  if  in  this 
order  there  were  anything  amiss,  it  was  the  order  of  the 
Council-table,  not  mine :  and  far  enough  off  from  treason,  as 
I  conceive. 

1.  Upon  this  charge  there  were  two  instances.  The  first  is 
Mr.  Bartley  *,  who  said,  his  house  was  taken  from  him,  by 
order  to  the  Lord  Mayor,  1637 ;  that  my  hand  was  to  the 
order ;  that  he  was  imprisoned  six  months,  and  recovered 
6001.  damages  of  Sir  Edw.  Bromfield ;  that  after  this  he  was 
committed  to  Flamsted,  a  messenger  belonging  to  the  High- 
Commission,  about  Dr.  Bastwick's  and  Mr.  Burton's  books; 
that  after  this  he  was  sent  for  to  the  Council,  and  there  heard 
my  voice  only ;  that  when  he  desired  some  help,  Sir  Tho. 
Ailsbury'sk  man  told  him,  he  were  as  good  take  a  bear  by  the 
tooth  :  that  all  this  was  for  his  entertaining  a  man  that  came 
out  of  Scotland ;  and  lastly,  that  Dr.  Haywood,  my  chaplain, 
had  licensed  a  popish  book l. 

1  ['  present '  in  margin.] 

1  ['  John  Bartlett,'  Lords' Journals.]  to  Breda,  where  he  died  in  1651.    His 

k  [Sir  Thomas  Ailesbury,  Master  of  daughter  Frances  was  the  wife  of  Ed. 

the  Eequests,  and  Master  of  the  Mint.  Hyde,  afterwards  Earl  of  Clarendon. 

He  adhered  to  the  cause  of  the  King,  (Wood,  F.  0.  i.  305.)] 

and  retired  first  to  Antwerp,  and  then          l  [William  Haywood  had   licensed 

LAUD. — VOL.  IV. 


Die  Tertio  To  which  I  gave  this  answer :  That  if  the  Lord  Mayor  put 
et  Quarto.  ^m  ^Q^  ^  house  by  order  from  the  Lords,  (being  a  sta 
tioner  among  the  goldsmiths,)  then  it  was  not  done  by  me  : 
and  though  my  hand  were  to  the  order,  yet  riot  mine  alone; 
and  I  hope  my  hand  there  subscribed  no  more  treason  than 
other  lords'  hands  did :  and  if  he  did  recover  600/.  against 
Sir  Edw.  Bromfield,  who,  I  think,  was  the  Lord  Mayor  spoken 
of,  surely  he  was  a  gainer  by  the  business.  And  whereas  he 
says,  he  was  after  seized  again,  and  committed  to  Flamsted 
about  the  books  named :  if  he  were  (as  was  informed)  a  great 
vender  of  those,  and  such  like  books,  less  could  not  be  done 
to  him,  than  to  call  him  to  answer.  He  says  further,  that 
he  was  sent  for  to  the  Council-table,  and  there  he  heard  my 
voice  only  against  him.  It  may  be  so,  and  without  all  fault 
of  mine :  for  that  heavy  office  was  usually  put  upon  me  and 
the  Lord  Keeper,  to  deliver  the  sense  of  the  Board  to  such  as 
were  called  thither,  and  examined  there  :  and  by  this  means,  248 
if  any  sour  or  displeasing  sentence  passed  (how  just  soever,  it 
mattered  not),  it  was  taken  as  our  own,  and  the  envy  of  it  fell 
on  us.  And  that  this  was  so,  many  lords  here  present  know 
well.  He  adds  what  Sir  Thomas  Ailsbury's  man  said1, 
when  he  would  have  petitioned  again  :  but  since  Mr.  Bartley 
is  single  here,  and  in  his  own  cause,  why  doth  he  rest  upon 
a  hearsay  of  Sir  Thomas  Ailsbury's  man  ?  Why  was  not  this 
man  examined  to  make  out  the  proof  ?  And  if  this  man  did 
so  far  abuse  me,  as  to  speak  such  words  of  me,  shall  I  be 
abused  first,  and  then  have  that  abuse  made  a  charge  ?  That 
he  was  troubled  thus  for  a  Scotchman's  coming  to  him,  is 
nothing  so,  nor  is  any  proof  offered 2  :  though  then  the 
troubles  were  begun  in  Scotland ;  and  therefore  if  this  had 
any  relation  to  that  business,  I  pleaded  again  the  Act  of 
Oblivion.  For  that  of  Dr.  Haywood,  I  shall  give  my  answer 
in  a  more  proper  place;  for  'tis  objected  again. 

2.  The  second  instance  was  in  Mr.  Manning's  m  case.     He 
speaks  also  of  the  order  of  the  Council,  Novemb.  12,  1634. 

1  ['what .  .  .  said/  in  margin.     Originally  written,  '  adds,  that'] 

2  ['  nor  .  .  .  offered  :'  in  margin.] 

Sales'  '  Introduction  to  a  Devout  Life,'          m  ['  Francis  Manning,'  Lords'  Jour- 
which  was  afterwards  called   in    by      nals.J 
proclamation,  of  which  more  below.] 


That  the  Goldsmiths  in  their  book  made  an  order  upon  it ',  Die  Tertio 
June  1 5,  1635,  that  they  which  obey  not,  should  be  suspended,  et  Quarto> 
(I  think  'tis  meant,  from  use  of  their 2  trade ;)  that  when 
some  entreated  them  to  obedience,  I  should  say,  '  This  Board 
is  not  (119)  so  weak,  but  that  it  can  command;'  or  to  that 

For  the  Council's  order,  it  was  theirs,  not  mine.  For  the 
order  which  the  Company  of  Goldsmiths  made  upon  it,  it 
was  their  own  act,  I  had  nothing  to  do  with  it.  For  the 
words,  if  I  did  speak  them  (which  is  more  than  I  remember), 
he  is  single  that  swears  them,  and  in  his  own  cause.  But, 
my  Lords,  I  must  needs  say,  whether  I  spake  it  then,  or  not, 
most  true  it  is,  that  the  Council-table  is  very  weak  indeed, 
if  it  cannot  command  in  things  of  decency,  and  for  safety  of 
the  subject,  and  where  there  is  no  law  to  the  contrary.  And 
this  was  then  my  answer. 

The  third  charge  of  this  day  was,  that  I  forced  men  to  III. 
lend   money  to  the  Church  of  St.  Paul's  :    and  Mrs.  Moore 
was  called  upon.     But  this  was  deserted. 

The  next  charge  was  concerning  a  long  and  tedious  suit  IV. 
between  Rich  and  Poole,  about  the  parsonage  of  North- 
Cerny  in  Gloucestershire;  that  Rich  was  turned  out  after 
three  years'  possession,  by  a  reference  procured  by  Poole  to 
the  Lord  Keeper  Coventry  and  myself;  and  that  I  did  in  a 
manner  act  the  whole  business  at  the  reference ;  that  letters 
were  sent  from  the  Council  to  Sir  Wi.  Masters,  one  of  the 
patrons,  to  see  Poole  instituted,  and  to  imprison  Rich  if  he 
refused  obedience  :  that  after,  by  the  Ld.  Marshal's  procure 
ment,  there  was  another  reference  obtained  to  thirteen  lords ; 
who  awarded  for  Rich. 

I  was  never  more  weary  of  any  business  in  my  life,  than 
I  was  of  this  reference :  and  I  was  so  far  from  acting  the 
whole  business,  as  that  I  did  nothing,  but  as  the  Ld.  Keeper 
directed ;  the  cause  was  so  entangled  with  Quare  impedits, 
and  many  other  businesses  of  law.  Our  judgments  upon  full 
hearing  went  with  Poole,  and  we  certified  accordingly :  and 
249  upon  this  (it  may  be)  the  letters  mentioned  were  sent  down 
for  Poole.  And  if  the  Ld.  Keeper  that  now  is,  then  his 

1  ['  upon  it,,'  originally  '  upon  it,  that ']  2  ['  their '  orig.  '  his '] 

IT  2 


DieTertio  Majesty's  Solicitor  n,  could  not,  or  durst  not  meddle,  but  gave 
it  Quarto.  ^^^  n|g  fQQ  ^as  was  farthcr  urged),  his  Lp.  is  living  to  tell  the 
cause  himself;  for  here  was  none  set  down,  though  it  were 
urged,  as  if  he  did  it  because  I  was  a  referee :  and  in  the 
meantime  this  is  but  a  bare  report  concerning  him  *.  If  the 
thirteen  lords,  to  whom  it  was  after  referred,  were  of  another 
opinion,  that  was  nothing  to  us,  who  without  any  touch  of 
corruption,  did  as  our  knowledge  and  conscience  guided  us. 
And,  my  Lords,  it  seems  this  title  was  very  doubtful;  for 
after  all  this,  it  came  into  this  Parliament,  was  referred  to  a 
Committee,  where  Mr.  Rich  was  very  willing  to  compound 
the  business.  "  And  well  he  might ;  for  I  was  since  certified 
by  a  gentleman,  a  lawyer,  that  understood  well,  and  was  at 
the  hearing  of  that  cause,  that  it  was  one  of  the  foulest 
causes  on  Rich's  side,  that  ever  he  heard.  And  out  of  this 
I  took  the  sum  of  my  answer,  which  I  gave  to  Mr.  Browne, 
when  he  summed  up  my  charge  V 

The  witnesses  to  this  charge  were  Mr.  Rich  °  his  brother, 
and  my  good  friend  Mr.  Talboys  P.  But  this  latter  witnesses 
nothing  but  that  he  heard  me  say,  that  Poole's  behaviour 
was  unfit ;  so  there  I  checked  the  one  party :  and  that  upon 
some  words  given  me  by  Rich,  I  should  say,  Do  you  throw 
dirt  in  my  face  ?  And  why  might  I  not  ask  this  question,  if 
his  words  deserved  it  ?  So  upon  the  matter,  here  is  Rich 
single  in  his  brother's  case;  and  nothing  throughout  that 
looks  like  treason. 

Here  I  had  a  snap  given  me,  that  I  slighted  the  evidence, 
whereas  they  (as  'twas  said)  did  not  urge  these  particulars 
as  treason,  but  as  things  tending  to  the  violation  of  law,  and 
should  be  found  to  make  treason  in  the  result.  "  The  truth 
is,  I  did  then  think  within  myself,  that  such  evidence  might 
very  well  be  slighted  in  an  accusation  of  treason.  But  I 
thought  better  to  forbear  ;  and  so,  in  my  continued  patience, 
expected  the  next  charge." 
V.  Which  was,  Mr.  Foxlie's  <i  imprisonment  about  Popish 

' concerning  him.'  originally  'of  him.'] 
'  And  out .  .  .  charge.'  on  opposite  page.] 

n  [Sir  Edw.  Littleton.]  in  Lords'  Journals.] 
0  ['Edward  Rich/  Lords' Journals.]          1  [This  person  was  Thomas  Foxty, 

p  P.  110  [of  orig.  MS.     See  above,  at  one  time  Lecturer  of  S.  Martin's-in- 

p.  77.    The  name  is  '  Richard  Talbois,'  the-Pields.     See  a  detailed  account  of 

OF   AllCHBISHOP   LAUD.  101 

books  l.      That  he  was  tendered  the   oath  ex  qfficio  ;    then  Die  Tertio 
brought  before  the  Council,  and  imprisoned  again  by  a  warrant  et  Quarto- 
under  my  hand  and  others';  and  my  hand  first  to  the  warrant ; 
his  wife  not  suffered  to  come  to  him  till  he  was  sick ;  that 
the  chief  cause  of  all  this  was  the  impropriations,  because 
he  desired  to  name  the  men  for  the  feoffment. 

My  Lords,  this  man  confesses  he  was  called  in  question 
about  Popish  books;  but  expressing  no  more,  I  cannot  tell 
what  to  make  of  it 2 ;  nor  can  I  tell  how  to  accuse  him  of 
Popish  books.  "  For  I  cannot  tell  which  is  least,  his  under 
standing  of  them,  or  his  love  to  them."  And  for  tendering 
him  the  oath  ex  qfficio,  that  was  the  usual  proceeding  in  that 
Court 3.  When  he  was  brought  before  the  Lords  of  the 
Council,  he  says  the  warrant  for  his  imprisonment  '  was  under 
my  hand  and  others'/  This  was  according  to  course  :  so  the 
commitment  of  him  was  by  the  Lords,  not  by  me.  But  my 
hand  was  first ;  so  was  it  in  all  things  else,  to  which  I  was  to 
set  it.  (120)  And  the  restraint  of  his  wife 4  from  coming  to 
him,  was  by  the  same  order  of  the  Lords :  and  upon  her 
petition,  when  her  husband  was  sick,  both  of  them  confess 
she  had  admittance.  But  whereas  he  says,  the  chief  cause  of 
250  his  commitment  was  the  feoffment,  he  is  much  mistaken  : 
himself  says  before,  it  was  about  Popish  books.  This  I  am 
sure  of,  the  feoffment  was  not  so  much  as  mentioned  against 
him :  though  he  freely  confesses,  that  he  got  twelve  men  to 
undertake  that  feoffment,  which  was  a  great  deal  more  power 
than  he  could  take  to  himself  by  law.  And  his  wife  speaks 
not  one  word  to  the  cause  of  his  imprisonment.  So  he  is 
single,  and  in  his  own  cause;  and  no  treason,  unless  it  be 
against  Mr.  Foxlye. 

The  next  charge  of  this  day,  was  Mr.  Vassall's  imprison-    VI. 
ment r :  and  to  save  repetition,  I  shall  weave  all  the  circum 
stances  of  aggravation  and  my  answer  together. 

1  [Orig.  written  ' books.    His'] 

2  [Orig.  'of  it.     For  I  cannot'] 

3  [*  And  for  ...  Court.'  in  margin.]  4  [Orig.  '  wife  was  by  '] 

the  proceedings  respecting  him,  re-  for  refusing  to  pay  the  Tonnage  and 

lated  in  the  manner  most  unfavourable  Poundage,   which  the   King  claimed 

to  Laud,  in  Prynne's  Cant.  Doom,  pp.  without  the   consent   of  Parliament. 

387,  388.]  See  Rush  worth's  Collections,  vol.  i.  p. 

r  [Samual  Vassall  was  imprisoned  (>41 ;  and  Append,  pp.  5(5,  57.] 


Die  Tertio  First,  he  is  single  in  all,  both  substance  and  circumstance. 
Secondly,  he  says  ( that  he  conceives  I  was  the  cause  of  his 
imprisonment/  But  his  conceit  is  no  proof.  He  says  again, 
that  I  said  at  the  Council-table  (whither  he  was  called), 
'  Why  sit  we  here,  if  we  be  not  able  to  judge  ? '  It  may  be, 
my  Lords,  I  said  so ;  I  remember  not  now  ;  but  if  I  did  say 
so,  it  was  of  such  things  only  as  were  fit  and  proper  for  that 
honourable  Board  to  judge  of.  Then  he  charged  me,  that  I 
should  there  say,  '  that  he  did  eat  the  bread  out  of  the 
King's  children's  mouths ;  and  that  if  he  were  in  another 
country  he  would  be  hanged  for  it.'  "  I  doubt  this  gentle 
man  has  borrowed  some  of  Sir  Hen.  Vane's  memory :  but 
I  remember  no  such  thing."  Yet  if  I  did  say  it,  it  was  no 
treason1  :  for  if  I  did  say  he  might  be  hanged  for  the  like  in 
some  other  country,  it  was  because  the  laws  and  customs  of 
other  countries,  and  this  of  ours,  differ  in  many  things.  So 
that  by  this  speech,  he  was  to  thank  the  law  of  the  land 
for  his  preservation,  notwithstanding  his  opposition  against 
Majesty;  which,  where  the  laws  were  not  so  favourable  to 
the  subject2,  would  not  be  endured. 

He  says,  '  he  was  fain  to  deposit  300/.  into  the  hand  of 
Sir  Abra.  Daws9,  and  that  it  was  taken  out  the  next  day.' 
But  he  says  withal,  it  was  done  by  a  decree  at  the  Council- 
board  ;  and  I  hope  I  shall  not  be  held  author  of  all  decrees 
which  passed  there.  He  says,  that  I  called  him  '  Sirrah  :'  a 
high  crime,  if  I  did  so !  high  treason  at  least !  But  sure 
this  gentleman's  spleen  swelled  up  Sir  into  Sirrah  :  for  that 
is  no  language  of  mine  to  meaner  men  than  Mr.  Vassal  is. 
"  The  main  of  this  charge  is  words ;  and  those  (if  uttered) 
hasty,  not  treasonable  :  and  as  M.  Lepidus  spake  in  the  case 
of  C.  Lutorius  Priscus,  Vana  a  scelestis,  dicta  a  maleficiis 
differunt  * ;  Vain  things  differ  from  wicked,  and  words  from 
malicious  deeds :  and  let  any  man  else  be  sifted  as  I  have 
been  for  3  all  the  time  I  have  been  a  bishop,  which  is  now 
upon  the  point  of  twenty  and  three  years,  and  I  doubt  not 
but  as  high  words  as  these  will  be  heard  fallen  from  him 

1  ['was  no  treason  :'  originally  written,  '  it  was  (some  words  illegible)  much 
less  treason :'] 

2  ['to  the  subject'  in  margin.]  3  ['been  for'  orig.  written  'been  from'] 

An  officer  of  the  Custom?.]  *  Tacit,  lib.  iii.  Annal.  [cap.  50.] 


upon   less   occasion,    and   of  greater   personages   than   Mr.  Die  Tertio 
Vassal  is.     Besides,  Mr.  Vassal,  at  the  end  of  his  testimony,  et  Quarto< 
desired   the  Lords  he  might  have  reparation;    which  alto 
gether  in  law  infirms  that  which  he  testified  V 

After  this  followed  a  charge  about  a  grant  passed  from   VII. 
his  Majesty  to  one  Mr.  Smith.     The  difference  was  between 
Mrs.  Burrill  and  him. 

As  far  as  I  can  recall,  it  was  thus.  The  King  had  made 
a  grant  to  Mr.  Burrill,  in  his  lifetime,  of  a  wharf  or  some 
thing  else  belonging  to  the  Thames.  Mr.  Smith  conceals 
251  this,  and  gets  a  grant  from  his  Majesty,  over  the  head  of 
the  widow  and  her  children.  And,  as  himself  confesses,  his 
Majesty  being  informed  that  Mrs.  Burrill  was  sister  to  the 
reverend  prelate  Bishop  Andrews,  being  then  dead,  should  u 
say,  that  he  would  not  have  granted  it  to  Mr.  Smith,  had  he 
known  so  much.  This  2  was  an  honourable  memory  of  his 
faithful  servant,  her  worthy  brother.  But  whatsoever  was 
done  in  this  business,  was  by  order  of  the  Council-board,  and 
not  by  me :  as  was  also  the  250/.  which,  he  says,  was  paid  in 
to  Sir  Wi.  Beecher,  (by  way  of  deposit,  as  I  conceive ;)  in 
which,  if  he  had  any  hard  measure,  the  law  was  open  for  his 
right.  And  in  the  whole  business  he  is  single,  and  in  his 
own  cause. 

The  next  charge  was  Sir  Jo.  Corbett's v ;  which  because  it    VIIT. 
is  expressed  at  large  in  the  Article  before  recited,  I  shall  not 
here  repeat,  but  apply  the  answer  to  it  which  I  then  gave. 

Sir  John  says,  he  '  was  sent  for  about  reading  the  Petition 
(121)  of  Right,  at  a  sessions  in  the  country ;  and  that  the 
Earl  of  Bridgwaterw  should  say,  he  was  disaffected  to  the 
King.'  This  concerns  not  me  in  anything.  He  says,  '  that 
for  this  he  was  committed,  lay  long  in  the  Fleet,  and  was 
denied  bail : '  but  he  says  it  was  denied  by  the  whole  Board. 
"  So  by  his  own  confession,  this  was  the  act  of  the  Council, 

1  ['  of  his  .  .  .  testified.'  on  opposite  page.] 

2  ['being  then  .  .   .  This  '  in  margin.     Orig.  written,  'he  would  not  have 
given,  made  (sic)  that  grant  to  Mr.  Smith,  which '] 

»  « did  '  w  [John  Egerton,  first  Earl  of  Bridge- 
v  [Sir  John  Corbet  was  created  a  water,  son  and  heir  to  the  Lord  Chan- 
Baronet  Sept.  19,  1627.     He  opposed  cell  or  Egerton,  first  Viscount  Brack- 
King  Charles's  forced  loan.]  ley.] 


Die  Tertio  not  mine.     And  this  answer  I  gave  to  Mr.  Browne,  when  he 
put  this  part  of  the  charge  into  his  sum  l." 

In  his  cause  with  Sir  Jo.  Stonehouse  about  a  waste,  I 
cannot  recall  the  particulars  :  but  whatever  was  done  therein, 
himself  confesses  was  by  order  at  the  Council-table,  and  his 
Majesty  present,  April  18,  1638. 

For  the  aisle  built  by  the  Lord  Viscount  Kilmurryex ;  the 
grant  which  I  made  was  no  more  than  is  ordinary  in  all  such 
cases.  And  'tis  expressed  in  the  body  of  the  grant,  Quantum 
in  nobis  est,  et  de  jure  possumus  * ;  so  there  is  nothing  at  all 
done  to  the  prejudice  of  Sir  John's  inheritance  :  for  if  we 
cannot  grant  it  by  law,  then  the  grant  is  voided  by  its  own 
words.  And  that  the  grant  was  such,  and  no  other,  I 
showed  the  deeds  ready  attested  out  of  the  office.  Besides, 
had  I  wronged  him,  there  was  an  ordinary  remedy  open,  by 
appeal  to  the  delegates.  And  this  was  well  known  to  him  ; 
for  he  did  so  appeal  from  a  like  grant  against  him,  by  the 
now  Lord  Bishop  of  Duresme,  then  of  Lichfield z,  and  Sir 
John's  diocesan.  And  whereas  'tis  alleged,  '  that  I  made 
this  grant  without  the  consent  of  him  the  patron,  or  the  then 
incumbent/  Sir  John  acknowledges,  like  a  gentleman,  that 
I  sent  unto  him  for  his  consent,  if  it  might  have  been  had. 
And  this  I  foresaw  also,  that  if  I  had  denied  the  Ld.  Viscount 
that  which  was  not  unusual,  then  the  complaint  would  have 
fallen  more  heavy  on  the  other  side,  that  I  made  persons  of 
quality  in  a  manner  recusants,  by  denying  them  that  con- 
veniency  which  was  in  my  power  to  grant.  So  I  must  be 
faulty,  whatever  I  do. 

IX.  Then  the  business  of  the  tithes  of2  London  was  raised  up 
in  judgment  against  me.  And  it  was  read  out  of  my  diary, 
that  I  projected  to  give  the  ministers 3  assistance  therein a. 

I    had   been   much  to   blame,    having   been4    Bishop    of 
London,  should  I  have  had  other  thoughts.    For  their  case  is 

'  Browne  .  .  •.  sum.'  in  margin.]         2  ['of  orig.  'of  the'] 

''  the  ministers '  orig.  '  them  ']  4  ['  having  been '  orig.  '  being '] 

1  [Robert  Needham,    second    Vis-  in  Reg.  Laud,  foil.  282  a.b.  283  a.] 

count  Kilmorey.]  z  (Thomas  Morton.] 

y  [The   licence  for  constructing  an  *  [See  vol.  iii.  p.  254.] 
aisle  to  Adderley  Church  is  recorded 


very  hard ;  all  their  offerings  being  shrunk  away  into  nothing,  Die  Tertio 
252  but  a  poor  Easter-book.  The  ministers  of  London  had  often  et  Quarto- 
petitioned  about  some  relief  long  before  my  time :  and  I  did 
then,  and  do  still  think  it  most  just  they  should  have  it. 
"  For  they  are  now  under  the  taskmasters  of  Egypt ;  the 
tale  of  brick  must  be  made,  they  must  preach  twice  a  Sunday, 
get  straw  where  they  canb."  And  yet  I  never  thought  of 
anything  contrary  to  law,  had  all  been  done  which  I  desired. 
For  that  was  no  more,  than  that  the  citizens  would  volun 
tarily  yield  to  some  reasonable  addition,  where  right  and 
need  appeared :  and  this,  I  am  sure,  nor  did  nor  could  cross 
with  the  Act  of  Parliament0  concerning  the  tithes  of  London d. 
And  Mr.  Moss,  who  is  their  only  witness  in  this  particular, 
says  no  more  against  me,  but  that  'I  pressed  this  business 
much,  and  often :'  which  is  most  true  I  did,  and  held  it  my 
duty  so  to  do ;  but  still  in  the  way  before  mentioned. 

After  this  came  the  great  charge  (as  it  was  accounted)  X. 
concerning  the  censure  of  Mr.  Pryn,  and  Burton,  and  Bast- 
wick,  in  the  Star-Chamber,  and  their  banishment  (as  'tis 
called)  upon  it.  The  witnesses  produced  in  some  circum 
stances  of  that  cause  were  Mr.  Cockshot6,  Tho.  Edwards, 
W.  Wickens,  Mr.  Burton,  Mrs.  Bastwicke,  and  Mr.  Pryn 
himself.  The  censure  is  known,  and  urged  to  be  against 
law :  but  so  far  as  any  particular  is  put  upon  me,  my  answer 
is  present  to  it. 

1.  And  first  for  Mr.  Cockshot :  he  says,  Mr.  Attorney 
Bankes  '  sent  him '  (being  then  his  servant)  '  to  give  me  an 
account  of  that  business  :'  hence  'tis  inferred,  that  I  took  care 
of  it.  This  might  have  had  some  show  of  proof,  if  I  had 
sent  to  Mr.  Attorney  to  give  me  an  account  of  it.  But 
there's  no  word  of  any  such  proof.  And  yet,  considering 
what  relation  their  cause  had  to  the  Church,  if  I  had  sent 
and  desired  some  account  of  the  proceedings,  I  humbly  con 
ceive  (my  place  in  the  Church  considered)  it  could  have 
been  no  great  crime. 

b  Exod.  v.  7.  of  this  matter  is  to  be   found  in   a 
c  [37  Hen.  VIII.  cap.  xiL]  treatise  by  Dr.  Brian  Walton,  printed 
d  [See  the  petition  of  the  London  from  MSS.  Lamb.  Numb.  273,  in  Brew- 
Clergy,  and  some  further  proceedings  ster's  Collectanea  Ecclesiastica.] 
thereon,  in    Kushworth's  Collections,          e  ['  John  Cocket,'  Lords'  Journals.] 
vol.  ii.  pp.  269,  seq.  The  fullest  account 


Die  Tertio  2.  Then  were  read  certain  warrants :  one,  Febr.  1,  1632, 
rto'  for  com(122)mitment;  another  of  Febr.  2,  1636,  to  bar 
access  to  them.  These  were  acts  of  the  Lords  sitting  in 
Star-Chamber,  not  mine.  Then  was  read  a  third  order  after 
sentence  given,  of  May  13,  1634,  for  the  seizing  of  his  books. 
But  this,  as  the  former,  was  an  act  of  the  Court,  not  mine  : 
and  'tis  expressed  in  the  order  (as  the  charge  itself  lays  it 
down1)  for  the  disposal  of  the  books  '  according  to  law/  Then 
the  warrant  of  their  commitment  to  the  islands,  Aug.  27, 
1637.  This  commitment  was  no  device  of  mine;  nor  did 
I  ever  hear  of  it,  till  it  was  spoken  by  others  in  the  Star- 
Chamber  :  nor  do  any  one  of  these  warrants  prove  anything 
that  can  be  called  my  act.  And  I  humbly  conceive,  that  I 
ought  not  by  law,  nor  can  by  usage  of  parliamentary  pro 
ceedings,  be  charged  single  for  those  things,  which  were  done 
in  public  courts.  The  last  order  was  November  12,  1637, 
about  the  Aldermen  of  Coventry,  and  the  Quo  warranto 
resolved  upon  against  the  charter  of  that  city,  only  for  sup 
posed  favours  showed  to  Mr.  Pryn  in  his  passage  that  way. 
First,  'tis  confessed  in  the  charge,  that  this  was  an  act  of  the 
Lords.  Secondly,  that  it  was  made  at  a  full  Board.  Thirdly, 
'tis  not  urged,  that  any  one  man  disliked  it.  Fourthly,  the 
complaint  which  caused  it  was,  that  both  aldermen  and  their 
wives,  and  other  citizens,  were  not  content  to  show  Mr.  Pryn  253 
kindness ;  but  they  both  did  and  spake  that  which  was  dis 
graceful  to  the  Star-Chamber  sentence.  But  howsoever, 
there  is  no  particular  in  that  order,  that  is  or  can  be  charged 
upon  me. 

3.  This  for  the  warrants.     The   next  witness  concerning 
this  charge  was  Tho.  Edwards.     He  says,  '  that  three  ham 
pers  of  Mr.  Pryn's   books  were   taken   out  of  his  house/ 
(whither,  it  seems,  they  were  conveyed  for  safety,)  '  and  no 
warrant  showed  to  take  them/     The  weaker  man  he,  to  let 
his  friend's  books  go  so.    But  this  witness  hath  not  one  word 
of  me. 

4.  The  next  witness   was  Wi.  Wickens  ;    he    says,   '  he 
knew  of  no  warrant  neither ;  but  that  licence  was  given  by 
the  sheriffs   about   six  years  since/     Here's  never  a  word 

1  [ '  lays  it  down '  originally  written  '  confesses  '] 


concerning  me ;    nor  am  I  to  answer  for  the  sheriffs'  act.  Die  Tertio 
And  whereas  it  is  an  aggravation  in  the  charge,  ( that  all  et  Qua 
Mr.  Pryn's  books  l  were  sold  : '    Tho.  Edwards  says,  there 
were  but  three  hampers  of  them ;  and  this  witness  says,  he 
bought  them  for  two-and-thirty  pounds  :  and  these,  neither 
by  number  nor  price,  could  be  half  of  Mr.  Pryn's  books  2,  if 
I  have  heard  truth  of  his  library. 

5.  After  this  man's  testimony,  comes  Mr.  Pryri  himself  in 
his  own  cause.  He  made  a  long  relation  of  the  business,  and 
full  of  bitterness  against  me.  This  I  doubt  not  was  purposely 
done,  to  represent  me  as  odious  as  he  could,  to  the  Lords 
and  the  hearers.  But  I  shall  assume  nothing  to  myself,  that 
was  done  by  order  of  the  Court  of  Star-Chamber  :  whatsoever 
was  done  there  by  common  consent,  was  their  act,  not  mine ; 
and  if  any  treason  be  in  it,  they  are  as  guilty  as  I;  for 
treason  admits  no  accessories.  Nor  will  I  meddle  with  the 
language :  God  forgive  him  that,  and  whatever  else  he  hath 
done  against  me  :  only  I  shall  answer  to  all  such  particulars 
of  his,  as  seem  to  touch  upon  myself. 

(1.)  First  then  he  says,  'he  brought  a  prohibition,  an. 
1629,  and  that  was  the  ground  of  my  hatred  against  him/ 
For  prohibitions,  I  shall  answer  when  they  are  charged  :  but 
as  I  remember  not  this,  so  I  bare  him  no  hatred ;  and  bear 
ing  him  none,  it  could  not  be  for  that  cause :  nor  doth  he 
so  much  as  offer  to  prove  it  was. 

(2.)  Next  he  says,  '  I  gave  direction  to  Mr.  Attorney  Noy, 
and  that  Dr.  Heylin  drew  some  informations  for  him/ 
Dr.  Heylin  was  well  acquainted  with  Mr.  Attorney ;  but  how 
long,  or  upon  what  grounds,  I  know  not :  nor  did  I  give 
Mr.  Attorney  any  direction.  What  Dr.  Heylin  did,  if  he  did 
anything,  is  nothing  to  me,  unless  I  set  him  on ;  which  is 
not  proved,  nor  sworn. 

(3.)  He  further  says,  that  'Mr.  Attorney  read  his  book 
twice  over,  and  said  that  he  found  nothing  amiss  in  it/ 
I  know  not  what  Mr.  Attorney  said  to  him ;  nor  what  he 
may  say  of  Mr.  Attorney,  now  he  is  dead :  this  I  am  sure  of, 
and  'tis  well  known  to  some  of  your  Lps.,  he  said  far  other 
wise  in  open  court. 

Mr.  Pryn's  books'  originally  ''his  books'] 
books/  in  margin.] 


Die  Tertio       (4.)   He  says,  f  that  his  book  was  licensed  to  the  press, 
it  Quarto.  and  afteY  t^t  seize^  and  that  t^G  messenger  told  him  it  was 

done  by  me/  This  was  done  by  warrant  of  the  High-Com 
mission,  not  by  me  :  nor  doth  he  offer  any  proof  against  me, 
but  that  the  messenger  told  him  so ;  which  is  a  bare  hearsay, 
and  no  proof. 

(5.)   Then  he  says,  '  that  there  was  another  order  given  254 
about  his  business,  and  that  I  did  it/     But  he  brings  no 
proof  for  this,  but  that  Mr.  Ingram,  the  then  keeper  of  the 
Fleet,  told  him  so.    But  this  is  as  bare  a  hearsay  as  the  former, 
and  Mr.  Ingram  not  produced  to  make  out  the  proof. 

(123)  (6.)  Then  he  says,  <  he  writ  me  a  letter,  and  that 
I  sent  it  to  Mr.  Attorney,  to  have  him  yet  further  proceeded 
against/  'Tis  true,  my  Lords,  he  did  write  unto  me ;  but 
whether  it  were  a  letter,  or  a  libel,  I  leave  other  men  to 
judge.  This  letter  I l  did  send  to  Mr.  Attorney ;  but  only  to 
let  him  see  how  I  was  used,  not  to  have  any  further  proceed 
ing  against  him.  But  Mr.  Attorney  was  so  moved  at  the 
sight  of  it,  that  when  he  saw  me  next,  he  told  me  he  would 
call  him  ore  tenus  for  it.  Therefore  it  seems,  somewhat  was 
very  much  amiss  in  it 2,  call  the  writing  what  you  will. 

(7.)  He  says,  '  Mr.  Attorney  thought  he  had  not  kept  the 
letter ;  but  he  was  deceived,  for  he  had  it/  But  how  was 
Mr.  Attorney  deceived  ?  I'll  tell  your  Lordships  what  him 
self  told  me.  When  Mr.  Attorney  saw  that  I  would  not  agree 
to  any  further  prosecution,  he  sent  for  Mr.  Pryn,  showed  him 
the  letter,  and  thought,  after  he  had  read  it,  to  give  him  some 
good  counsel,  to  desist  from  that  libelling  humour  of  his. 
But  Mr.  Pryn,  after  he  had  got  the  letter  into  his  hands, 
went  to  the  window,  as  if  he  meant  to  read  it,  and  while 
Mr.  Attorney  was  otherwise  busied,  he  tare  it  into  small 
pieces,  and  threw  it  out  at  the  window,  and  then  said  unto 
him,  '  This  shall  never  rise  in  judgment  against  me/  Now 
he  confesses  he  hath  the  letter  still,  and  that  Mr  Attorney 
was  deceived :  belike  he  tare  some  other  paper  for  it,  and 
put  the  letter  in  his  pocket.  "  But  that  you  may  see  the 
honesty  of  this  man,  and  what  conscience  he  makes  of  that 
which  he  speaks  upon  his  oath ;  here  he  says  he  had  the 

1  ['letter  I'  originally  'letter  (since  he  calls  it  so)  I'] 

2  ['in  it,'  in  margin.] 


letter  still,   and  that  Mr.  Attorney  was  deceived  :  and  yet  Die  Tertio 
after  this,  when  he  sets  out  his  Breviate  of  my  life,  he  con-  et  Quarto' 
fesses,  in   an   unsavoury  marginal  note,    'that  he   tare   it, 
Mr.  Attorney  having  need  of  such  a  paper.f '     And  for  this 
Breviate  of  his,  if  God  lend  me  life  and  strength  to  end  this 
first,  I  shall  discover  to  the  world  the  base  and  malicious 
slanders  with  which  it  is  fraught." 

(8.)  He  went  on,  arid  said,  '  there  was  an  order  made 
against  him  when  term  was  done,  so  that  he  could  have  no 
remedy/  This  is  directly  against  the  Court  and  their  order, 
not  against  me. 

(9.)  Then  he  cites  out  of  the  Epistle  before  my  speech 
in  the  Star-Chamber  s,  '  that  I  censured  him  for  having  his 
hand  in  the  pamphlets  of  those  times,  and  yet  was  doubtful 
of  it/  The  words  are :  '  For  I  doubt  his  pen  is  in  all  the 
pamphlets/  But  first,  'tis  acknowledged  I  gave  no  vote  at 
all  in  his  censure :  and  if  I  did  not  judicially  censure  him, 
then  sure  I  was  not  doubtful,  and  yet  censured.  Secondly, 
he  was  censured  upon  his  own  pamphlet :  and  his  hand  was 
certainly  in  his  own,  what  doubt  soever  I  might  make  of  its 
being  in  theirs.  And  thirdly,  if  the  words  be  extended  to 
their  pamphlets  also,  that's  nothing  to  prove  I  doubted  of 
the  justness  of  the  sentence.  For  the  words  are  not,  '  I  doubt 
his  pen  is  in  all  those  pamphlets  of  Mr.  Burton's  and  Dr. 
Bastwick's l ; '  but  '  in  all  the  pamphlets,'  whether  their 
255  libels,  or  any  others' ;  so  I  might  be  doubtful 2  of  the  one, 
and  yet  certain  enough  of  the  other. 

(10.)  And  whereas  he  adds,  '  that  he  was  jointly  charged 
with  Dr.  Bastwick  and  Mr.  Burton,  yet  could  not  be  suffered 
to  speak  together  for  a  joint  answer;  and  that  his  cross-bill 
was  refused/  All  this  was  done  by  the  Court  of  Star-Cham 
ber  ;  not  by  me.  And  your  Lps.  know  well  the  Ld.  Keeper 
managed  the  affairs  of  that  Court,  not  I. 

(11.)  Then  he  says,  '  that  at  last,  Mr.  Holt  came  to  him, 
but  was  threatened  that  very  afternoon  for  it/  But  he  doth 

1  [( Dr.  Bastwick's  ;'  originally  written,  '  Dr.  Bastwick's,  of  which  these  '] 

2  ['  doubtful '  originally  '  doubtful  enough  '] 

f  W.  Pryn's  Breviate  of  the  Arch-  *  Paulo  post  medium,   [p.  65.   in 

bishop's  Life,   p.  19.      [See  also  the  marg.  in  the  copy  followed    for  this 

Archbishop's  Diary  at  June  17,  1634.  reprint.] 
Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  221.] 


Die  Tertio  not  tell  your  Lps.  by  whom ;  and  for  my  part,  more  than 
rto'  civil  giving  him  the  time  of  the  day,  I  never  spake  with  him 
in  all  my  life. 

(12.)  He  tells  your  Lps.  next,  'how  he  passed  through 
Coventry,  (to  which  I  have  spoken  already11,)  and  how  through 
Chester,  and  how  some  Chester  men  were  used  concerning 
him,  and  his  entertainment/  But,  my  Lords,  whatsoever  was 
done  in  this,  was  by  the  High  Commission  at  York  * •  and  if 
anything  be  therein  amiss,  they  must  answer  that  did  it. 

(13.)  Lastly,  he  spake  of  '  sending  Sir  Wi.  Balfore  to  me, 
and  some  other  like  particulars/  Of  all  which  there  is  no 
proof,  but  a  bare  relation,  what  Mr.  Hungerford,  Mr.  Ingram, 
and  Sir  Wi.  Balfore  said ;  which  is  all  hearsay,  and  makes 
no  evidence,  unless  they  were  present  to  witness  what  is  said. 
"  And  here  give  me  leave  to  observe,  that  Mr.  Pryn  hath  in 
this  charge  woven  together  all  that  he  could  say  concerning 
both  causes,  for  which  he  was  censured :  for  in  the  third 
particular  he  speaks  of  his  book,  for  which  he  was  first  cen 
sured  ;  and  in  the  ninth  and  tenth,  of  his  cross-bill,  and  the 
like,  which  were  in  his  second  cause/'' 

6.  The  sixth  witness  was  Mr.  Burton,  a  party  too.  For 
that  which  he  said  agreeable  to  Mr.  Pryn,  it  received  the 
same  answer.  And  he  added  nothing  new,  but  '  that  his 
wife  was  kept  from  him  by  warrant  from  the  Lords : y  and  if 
it  was  by  the  Lords'  order,  then  was  it  not  by  me.  And 
when  it  was  replied,  that  till  he  was  sentenced  to  Garnsey, 
his  wife  had  access  to  him :  Mr.  Burton  answered,  '  Yea ; 
but,  my  Lords,  she  was  not  suffered  to  be  with  me  at  nights/ 
At  which  the  Lords  fell  a  laughing,  and  there  ended  his 

(124)  7.  The  last  witness  was  Mrs.  Bastwick :  and  she 
also  said  nothing  different  from  Mr.  Pryn ;  but  that  she  was 
kept  from  her  husband,  and  that  she  petitioned  the  Lords 
about  it :  but  of  me  in  particular,  not  one  word.  "  And 
though  Mr.  Brown,  in  his  last  reply  upon  me l,  said,  the  time 
of  these  men's  censure  was  the  noted  time  of  the  oppression 
of  the  subjects'  liberty;  yet  I  shall  crave  leave  to  say  of 

1  [From  *  me/  to  end  of  paragraph,  on  opposite  page.] 

h  P.  122.  [of  orig.  MS.     See  above,  p.  106.]  !  [See  vol.  iii.  p.  402.] 


these  men,  as  S.Augustin  once  said  of  two  great  Donatists  Die  Tertio 
in  his  time,  who,  it  seems,  had  received  some  sentence,  and  et  ^uarta 
afterwards  a  return,  not  altogether  unlike  these  men ;  (they 
were  Felicianus  and  Prastextatus ;)  of  those  thus  S.  Augustin  : 
f  If  these  men  were  innocent,  why  were  they  so  condemned  ? 
and  if  they  were  guilty,  why  were  they  with  such  honour 
returned,  and  received  k  ? '  This  applies  itself.  And  here  I  am 
willing  to  put  the  reader  in  mind  too,  that  Mr.  Brown  draw 
ing  up  an  exact  sum  of  my  charge,  and  pressing  it  hard 
against  me,  to  my  remembrance  (and  I  think  my  notes  could 
256  not  have  slipped  it)  passed  by  this  charge  l  concerning  Mr. 
Pryn ;  and  I  cannot  but  think,  he  had  some  reason  for  it." 

This  tedious  charge  being  over,  the  world  ran  round,  and   XL1 
I  was  brought  back  again  to  another  charge  about  demolish 
ing  the  houses  at  S.  Paul's ;  and  here  three  witnesses  more 
came  against  me. 

1.  The  first  was  Mr.  Bentlym.    He  said,  '  there  were  above 
sixty  houses   pulled  down/     I  answered,    I  know  not  the 
number ;  but  if  there  were  so  many,  the  recompense  given 
was  sufficient  for  more.     He  said  further,  'that  there  was 
twenty  yards  between  the  church  and  some  of  the  houses/ 
There  were  very  few,  if  any  such  (let  him  look  to  his  oath)  ; 
but  then  some  were  close  upon  the  wall  of  the  church.     And 
suppose  all  had  been  twenty  yards  distant;    that  was  not 
room  enough  to  bring  in  arid  lodge  materials  for  the  repair, 
and  to  turn  the  carriages.     And  here  again  I  made  mention 
of  my  salvo,  before  desired,  for  the  record  of  Ed.  III.  touch 
ing  the  like  buildings,  and  their  demolition. 

2.  The  second  witness  was  Mr.  Goaren.     For  the  sixty 
houses  as  was  before  testified,  I  gave  the  same  answer ;  as 
also,  that  the  act  of  the  Council-table  cannot  be  said  to  be 
my  act.  For  St.  Gregory's  Church,  they  were  not  left  without 
a  place  for  Divine  service  (as  he  would  fain  have  it  thought)  : 
for  they  were  assigned  to  a  part  of  Christ-Church,  till  another 

1  ['  charge '  originally  '  charge,  and  sure '] 

k    "Si  innocentes  erant,  quare  sic  here  properly  begins;    the  previous 

damnati  sunf?  si  scelerati,  quare  sic  cases  having  been  heard  on  the  third 

recepti]" — Aug.  Epist.  clxxii.  [li.Ben.  day,  according  to  Lords'  Journals.] 

§  2.  Op.,  torn.  ii.  col.  175.  B.  C.]  m  [' John  Bentley,'  Lords' Journals.] 

1  [The  business  of  the  fourth  day  n  ['  Gerrard  Gore,'  Lords'  Journals.] 


Die  Tertio  church  might  be  built  for  them  °.  And  for  the  pulling  down 
r  °'  of  St.  Gregory's,  'tis  well  known  to  divers  of  that  parish,  that 
1  was  not  so  much  as  one  of  the  referees,  to  whose  view  and 
consideration  it  was  referred.  But  the  truth  is,  this  man 
rented  the  parsonage-house,  and  had  a  good  pennyworth  of 
it  to  gain  by  his  under-tenant.  The  going  down  of  that  house 
troubles  him,  and  not  the  church. 

3.  The  third  witness,  Walter  Biggs  P,  says  nothing  different 
from  the  two  former ;  but  '  that  I  said  I  was  opposed  for  the 
pulling  down  of  the  houses.'  Whence  it  was  inferred,  that  it 
was  my  act ;  because  I  was  opposed.  But,  my  Lords,  I  hope 
I  might  say  '  I  was  opposed/  without  any  offence,  or  without 
taking  the  orders  of  the  Council-table  to  myself :  for  'tis  well 
known,  the  work  of  that  repair,  under  God,  was  mine ;  and 
I  took  no  indirect,  no  oppressing  way  to  it ;  nor  can  I  now 
be  ashamed  of  that,  which  in  future  times,  in  despite  of  the 
present  malice,  will  be  my  honour.  So  that  the  care  of  the 
work  lying  upon  me,  I  might  well  say  '  I  was  opposed,'  though 
the  opposition  went  higher,  against  the  orders  of  the  Lords. 
XII.  The  last  charge  of  this  day,  was  about  the  putting  down 
of  two  brewers  in  Westminster,  because  the  excessive  and 
noisome  smoke  from  thence  much  annoyed  the  King's  house, 
gardens,  and  park  at  S.  James.  These  two  were  Mr.  Bond** 
and  Mr.  Arnold r. 

1.  For  Mr.  Bond,  he  begins  with  somewhat  that  I  should 
say  at  the  Council-table:  as  namely,  that  fhe  must  seal  a 
bond  of  two  thousand  pounds,  to  brew  no  more  with  sea- 
coal.'  Now  this  argues,  if  I  did  so  speak,  that  it  was  in 
delivering  to  him  the  sense  of  the  Board;  which  office  (as 
I  have  before  expressed,  and  is  well  known)  was  usually  put 
upon  me,  if  I  were  present.  And  your  Lps.  may  here  again 
see,  what  envy  hath  followed  me  upon  that,  which  I  could 
not  decline.  He  says  further,  that  upon  this  '  Mr.  Attorney 
Banks  proceeded  against  him  in  the  Exchequer;'  that  there,  257 
upon  some  occasion,  '  the  Ld.  Chief  Baron  should  say,  Ye  are 
wise  witnesses  for  the  King ;'  that  '  his  counsel  were  forbid 

0  [See  the  orders  of  Council  relat-  mentioned  in  Lords'  Journals.] 

ing  to  S.  Gregory's  Church,  in  Kush-  i  ['  Edward  Bond,'  Lords' Journals.] 

worth's  Collections,  vol.  ii.  pp.  462,  r  ['Michael  Arnold,'    Lords'  Jour- 

463.]  nals.] 

p  [The  name  of  this  witness  is  not 


to  plead  ;  and  so  a  verdict  passed  for  the  King/     All  this  is  Die  Tertio 
nothing  to  me ;  I  was  neither  Chief  Baron  nor  witness,  nor  et 
one  of  the  jury  that  gave  the  verdict.     He  says,  he  was 
informed,  '  that l  there  was  an  order  of  Council  made,  that 
no  man  should  put  up  a  petition  for  him/     But  himself  doth 
not  so  much  as  mention,  that  this  order  was  procured  by  me  : 
and  it  is  but  a  report,  that  no  petition  might  be  delivered  for 
him ;  and  none  of  them  that  told  him  so,  produced  for  proof : 
so  he  scandalizes  the  Lords  by  hearsay. 

Next  he  says,  '  that  the  King  graciously  sent  him  with  a 
reference  to  the  Council  for  satisfaction/  First,  I  must 
believe,  if  he  were  so  sent,  the  wrong  being  only  the  King's, 
and  he  willing  he  should  have  satisfaction  however  for  his 
loss,  "  that  the  Lords  would  never  refuse  in  such  a  case, 
whatsoever  is  here  said  to  the  contrary.  Secondly,  it  may  be 
observed,  how  gracious  the  King  was  to  the  subject ;  that 
though  the  annoyance  was  great  to  that  house  of  his  recrea 
tion  and  retiring  near  the  city,  yet  he  would  not  have 
Mr.  Bond  suffer  without  satisfaction  :  notwithstanding  which 
goodness  of  the  King  2,  he  comes  into  this  great  Court ;  and, 
so  he  may  have  a  blow  at  me,  blasts  (as  much  [as]  in  him  lies) 
all  the  King's  proceedings,  under  the  name  of  op(1.25)pression, 
and  that  in  a  high  degree/'  He  says  also,  '  that  a  friend  of 
his  persuaded  him  to  come  to  me,  and  offer  me  somewhat  to 
S.  Paul's ;  and  that  he  did  come  to  me  accordingly,  and  that 
I  said  I  must  have  of  him  a  thousand  pound  to  S.  Paul's; 
that  he  was  not  unwilling  to  give  it,  because  his  brewing  was 
worth  twice  as  much  to  him/  My  Lords,  I  humbly  desire 
your  Lordships  to  consider  this  part  of  the  charge  well. 
First,  what  friend  of  his  this  was,  that  came  so  to  him,  he 
says  not,  nor  do  I  know,  and  so  have  no  possibility  to 
examine.  Secondly,  he  says  not  that  I  sent  this  friend  of 
his  to  him,  thus  to  advise  him  ;  and  then  his  coming  no  way 
concerns  me.  Thirdly,  when  he  was  come  upon  this  friend's 
persuasion,  if  he  were  willing  to  give  a  thousand  pound  to 
S.  Paul's,  in  regard  of  his  double  gain  from  his  brewhouse,  as 
himself  confesses 3 ;  I  do  not  see  (under  favour)  what  crime 

1  ['he  was  informed,  that'  in  margin.] 

2  ['notwithstanding  .  .  .  the  King,'  in  margin.] 

3  ['as  himself  confesses  ;'  in  margin.] 

LAUD.  — VOL.  IV.  I 


Die  Tertio  or  oppression  is  in  it.  Lastly,  I  remember  none  of  this,  and 
let  him  well  weigh  l  his  oath  with  himself :  for  I  cannot  call 
to  mind 2  one  penny  that  he  gave  to  S.  Paul's :  nor  yet  shall 
I  ever  think  it 3  a  sin,  to  take  a  thousand  pound  to  such  a 
work,  from  any  rich  and  able  man  that  shall  voluntarily  offer 
it;  especially  upon  hope  of  gaining  twice  as  much. 

To  make  this  charge  the  heavier,  he  says,  '  I  sent  him  to 
the  Queen-mother8,  who  lay  then  at  S.  James's;  and  that 
there  he  was  laboured  by  some  about  her  to  change  his 
religion,  and  then  he  should  have  all  favour.'  This  is  a  bold 
oath  ;  let  him  look  to  it,  for  I  sent  him  not.  It  may  be 
I  might  tell  him,  that  if  the  Queen-mother  were  offended 
with  the  annoyance  from  his  house,  it  would  not  be  in  my 
power  to  help  him;  which  was  true.  And  that  about  his 
religion,  was  added,  to  make  your  Lps.  think,  that  I  sent 
him  thither  for  that  purpose  :  but  God  be  thanked,  this 
witness  says  not  any  one  word  tending  that  way.  And  for 
[the]  Queen-mother,  since  she  is  thus  4  mentioned,  I  shall  258 
crave  leave  to  say  two  things  :  the  one,  that  I  did  both  in 
open  Council,  and  privately,  oppose  her  coming  into  England, 
with  all  the  strength  I  had ;  though  little  to  my  own  ease,  as 
I  after  found  :  the  other,  that  after  she  was  come,  the  Lords 
of  the  Council  went  in  a  body  to  do  their  duty  to  her :  that 
time  I  could  not  but  go ;  but  never,  either  before  or  after, 
was  I  with  her. 

Then  he  concludes,  ( that  there  was  a  capias  out  for 
him,  and  that  he  was  fain  to  make  an  escape  by  night, 
which  he  did  to  Alderman  Pennington,  who  very  nobly  suc 
coured  him  privately  in  his  house.'  All  which  concerns  me 

2.  The  other  witness  is  Mr.  Arnold ;  who  told  as  long  a 
tale  as  this,  to  as  little  purpose.  He  speaks  of  three  brew- 
houses  in  Westminster,  '  all  to  be  put  down,  or  not  brew  with 
sea-coal;  that  Secretary  Windebanck  gave  the  order/  Thus 

1  [A  word  erased  before  '  weigh '] 

2  ['  I  cannot  call  to  mind'  originally  *  I  do  not  rem.'  (sic.)] 

3  [' think  it'  originally  '  take  it '] 

4  ['  thus '  interlined.    Originally  written,  '  mentioned  in  this  way,'] 

[Mary  de  Medici?.     She  came  to  England  in  Oct.  1637.] 


far  it  concerns  not  me.  He  added,  'that  I  told  him  they  Die Tertio 
burnt  sea-coal.'  I  said  indeed,  I  was  informed  they  did ;  and  et  ^uarto' 
that  I  hope  was  no  offence.  He  says,  '  that  upon  Sir  John 
Bankes  his  new  information,  four  Lords  were  appointed  to 
view  the  brewhouses,  and  what  they  burnt/  But  I  was  none 
of  the  four,  nor  did  I  make  any  report,  for  or  against.  He 
says,  '  Mr.  Attorney  Banks  came  one  day  over  to  him,  and 
told  him  that  his  house  annoyed  Lambeth,  and  that  I  sent 
him  over/  The  truth  is  this  :  Mr.  Attorney  came  one  day 
over  to  dine  with  me  at  Lambeth,  and  walking  in  the  garden 
before  dinner,  we  were  very  sufficiently  annoyed  from  a 
brewhouse ;  the  wind  bringing  over  so  much  smoke,  as  made 
us  leave  the  place.  Upon  this  Mr.  Attorney  asked  me,  why 
I  would  not  show  myself  more  against  those  brewhouses  *, 
being  more  annoyed  by  them 2  than  any  other  ?  I  replied, 
I  would  never  be  a  means  to  undo  any  man,  or^  put  him 
from  his  trade,  to  free  myself  from  smoke.  And  this  witness 
doth  after  confess,  that  I  said  the  same  words  to  himself. 
Mr.  Attorney  at  our  parting  said,  he  would  call  in  at  the 
brewhouse :  I  left  him  to  do  as  he  pleased,  but  sent  him  not: 
and  humbly  desired  Mr.  Attorney  may  be  examined  of  the 
truth  of  this. 

He  further  says,  that  he  came  over  to  me  to  Lambeth, 
'and  confesses  the  words  before  mentioned;  and  that  he 
offered  me  ten  pound  yearly  to  S.  Paul's,  and  that  I  said  he 
might  give  twenty/  He  says,  that  '  I  sent  him  to  Mr.  At 
torney;  but  withal  told  him,  that  if  he  found  not  such 
favour  as  I  wished  him,  it  was  a  sign  he  had  more  powerful 
adversaries  than  my  friendship  could  take  off/  In  all  this 
I  cannot  see  what  fault  I  have  committed.  And  I  foretold 
him  truth :  for  though  the  business  (126)  were  after  referred 
to  Mr.  Attorney  and  myself,  (as  himself  says,)  yet  we  were 
not  able  to  end  it.  Then  he  says,  '  I  would  not  suffer  Sir 
Ed.  Powell,  Mster.  of  the  Requests,  to  deliver  his  petition  to 
the  King/  But  first,  this  is  but  Sir  Ed.  Powell's  report,  and 
so  no  proof,  unless  he  were  produced  to  justify  it.  Secondly, 
the  world  knows  I  had  no  power  in  Sir  Edward :  he  would 

1  ['  those  brewhouses,'  originally  written  '  those  brewhouses,  than '] 

2  ['  by  them '  in  margin.] 

I  2 


Die  Tertio  then  willingly  have  delivered  petition,  or  anything  else,  that 
st  Quarto.  jic  thought  might  hurt  me  :   and  the  cause  is  known  *. 

Lastly,  he  says ',  t  Mr.  Attorney  sent  out  a  capias  for  him ; 
that  the  sheriff  came  by  force  to  take  him,  and  what  hard 
shift  he  made  to  escape  :  that  after,  upon  his  petition,  the 
Lords  gave  him  six  months'  time  to  provide  himself  else 
where;  and  that  he  was  fain  to  give  five  hundred  pound 
bond  not  to  brew  there/  To  all  this  I  then  said,  and  say  259 
still :  First,  here's  no  one  thing  charged  upon  me  in  parti 
cular.  Secondly,  here's  not  a  word  of  my  advice  or  endeavour 
to  set  on  Mr.  Attorney,  or  to  move  the  Lords  to  anything 
against  him.  And  whereas  it  hath  been  urged,  that  my  power 
was  such,  that 2  I  swayed  the  Lords  to  go  my  way :  this 
cannot  be  said,  without  laying  an  imputation  upon  the  Lords, 
as  if  they  could  so  easily  be  over-wrought  by  any  one  man, 
and  that  against  law ;  which  is  a  most  unworthy  aspersion 
upon  men  of  honour.  And  if  all  this  were  true,  it  is  but 
treason  against 3  a  brewhouse.  Nor  yet  may  this  be  called 
slighting  of  any  evidence,  which  is  but  to  answer  home 
in  my  own  just  defence.  "And  out  of  this  I  gave  my 
answer  to  Mr.  Browne's  summary  charge  against  me  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  for  that  which  concerned  these  two 
brewers 4  V 

And  here,  before  I  close  this  day,  give  me  leave,  I  beseech 
your  Lps.,  to  observe  two  things  :     First,    that  here  have 

1  ['  he  says,'  originally  '  he  tells  me,'] 

2  ['  that '  originally  '  as  that ']  3  ['  against '  in  margin.] 
4  ['charge  .  .  .  brewers.'  on  opposite  page.] 

1  [Edward,  son  and  heir  of  Edward  answer  to  the  evidence  given  in  the 

Powell  of    Fulham    and   Pengethly,  morning;    and    that    Mr.  Dell,    his 

was  created  a  Baronet,  Jan.  18,  162£.]  Secretary,  shall  be  permitted  to  be 

u  [It  appears  from  the  Lords'  Jour-  with  him  during  the  trial  of  his  busi- 
nals,  that  on  Monday,  March  18,  the  ness."  It  was  ordered  in  the  after- 
Archbishop,  after  the  hearing  of  the  noon  sitting,  "  That  this  House  will 
two  last-mentioned  cases,  concerning  further  proceed  against  the  Arch- 
S.  Gregory's  Church  and  the  brewers,  bishop  of  Canterbury,  on  Friday 
made  his  reply  to  the  charges  brought  morning,  at  nine  of  the  clock;  and 
on  the  previous  Saturday;  that  the  that  in  the  meantime,  his  counsel 
House  then  adjourned  to  an  afternoon  shall  have  recourse  unto  him,  accord- 
sitting,  when  the  Archbishop  replied  ing  to  the  former  orders  of  this 
to  the  evidence  in  the  case  of  the  House ;  and  shall  have  a  salvo  to 
brewers.  It  was  ordered  in  the  make  use  of  the  Record  of  Edward  III., 
morning  sitting,  "  That  Ihe  Arch-  mentioned  by  the  Archbishop  this 
bishop  shall  have  liberty  till  four  of  day  in  his  defence.] 
the  clock  this  afternoon,  to  make  his 


been  thirteen  witnesses  at  least  produced  in  their  own  cause.  Die  Tertio 
Secondly,  that  whereas  here  have  been  so  many  things et  Quarto< 
urged  this  clay  about  the  Star-Chamber  and  the  Council- 
table  ;  the  Act  made  this  Parliament x,  for  the  regulating  of 
the  one,  and  the  taking  away  of  the  other,  takes  no  notice  of 
anything  past ;  and  yet  acts  past  (and  those  joint  acts  of  the 
Council,  and  not  mine)  are  urged  as  treasonable,  or  con 
ducing  to  treason,  against l  me.  Nay,  the  Act  is  so  far  from 
looking  back,  or  making  such  offences  treason,  as  that  if  any 
offend  in  future,  and  that  several  times,  yet  the  Act  makes  it 
but  misdemeanour,  and  prescribes  punishments  accordingly. 

1  ['  against '  originally  '  in '] 

*  [16  Car.  I.  cap.  x.] 


CAP.  XXVI.  260 


I.  THE  first  charge  of  this  day  was  concerning  the  indictment 

164±  22'     °f  Mr'  Newcommin,  a  minister  at  Colchester,  for  refusing  to 
DieQuinto.  administer  the  sacrament  but  at  the  rails  a;  and  the  prose 
cution  which  followed  against  Burrowes  for  this.     The  two 
witnesses  of  the  particulars  are  Burrowes  b  and  Mr.  Aske c. 

1.  The  testimony  which  Burrowes  gave  was:  'That  Mr. 
Newcommin  would  not  administer  the  communion  but  at 
the  rail ;  that  he  indicted  him  for  receiving  it  there ;  that 
the  foreman  threw  it  out/  &c.  If  Mr.  Newcommin  did  this, 
complaint  might  have  been  made  of  him;  but  howsoever, 
here's  no  one  word  of  any  command  from  me.  And  it  seems 
the  factious  malice  of  Burrowes  was  seen,  that  the  foreman 
at  first  threw  away  the  indictment.  He  says,  '  that  upon 
this  he  was  called  into  the  High  Commission ;  a  warrant  from 
me;  his  house  beset;  Stockdall  left  the  warrant  with  the 
Mayor ;  a  habeas  corpus  not  obeyed/  The  warrant,  by  which 
he  was  detained,  was  from  the  High  Commission,  not  from 
me :  and  himself  says l,  there  were  six  or  seven  hands  to 
the  warrant.  But  then  he  says2,  'My  hand  alone  was  to 
another  warrant 3 ; '  which  is  impossible,  for  there  must  be 
three  hands  at  the  least,  or  no  warrant  can  issue  out :  and 
all  his  proof  of  this  latter  is,  that  he  saw  my  hand ;  which 
I  hope  he  may  do,  though  other  hands  besides  mine  were 
to  it.  For  the  habeas  corpus,  if  the  Mayor  said,  (for  so 
Burrowes  adds,)  '  he  would  obey  my  warrant,  rather  than  the 
King's  writ,  because  it  came  first;'  he  was  extremely  ill- 
advised  :  but  if  a  mayor  of  a  town  give  an  indiscreet,  or  a 
worse  answer,  I  hope  that  shall  not  be  imputed  to  me.  And 

1  [Some  words  here  erased,  beginning,  'though  upon  oath,  speaks  either' 
the  rest  illegible.] 

2  ['But  then  he  says,'  in  margin.     Originally  written,  'And  by-and-by  he 
says/]  3  ['to  another  warrant'  originally  'to  it'] 

a  [This  appears  to  be  the  case  re-          b  [' Samuel  Burroughs,' Lords' Jour- 
ferred  to  in  Accounts  of  Province  for      nals.] 
the  year  1639.   Works,  vol.  v.  p.  364.]          c  [•  Richard  Aske,'  Lords' Journals.] 


if  there  be  anything  in  this  business,  why  is  not  Stockdall  Die 
the  messenger  produced,  that  knows  those  proceedings  ? 
Lastly,  he  speaks  '  of  a  letter  sent  to  Judge  Crawly  ed,  and 
showed  to  Judge  Hutton6/  But  first,  he  says  not,  that  letter 
was  sent  by  me,  or  by  my  means.  Secondly,  he  names  not 
the  contents  of  the  letter ;  (127)  without  which,  no  man  can 
tell,  whether  it  charge  anything  upon  me  or  not.  And  until 
the  letter  be  produced,  or  sufficiently  witnessed,  (neither  of 
which  is  offered,)  'tis  but  like  a  written  hearsay.  And  I  hum 
bly  pray  you  to  observe  from  himself,  that  the  two  reverend 
judges  looking  into  the  business,  said,  it  was  a  mere  cheat 
for  money,  and  returned  him  back  to  Colchester :  which  is  a 
proof  too,  that  the  habeas  corpus  was  obeyed  ;  for  if  he  were 
not  brought  up  before  them,  how  could  he  be  returned  by 

2.  Then  Mr.  Aske,  the  second  witness,  was  produced.  He 
said,  '  there  came  players  to  town,  and  that  some,  which  said 
they  came  from  me,  were  taken  in  a  tavern  upon  Easter-eve 
at  unseasonable  hours/  I  know  not  of  any  that  were  sent 
from  me:  but  if  any  were,  and  kept  any  disorder  in  the 
261  town,  especially  at  such  a  time,  Mr.  Aske  did  very  well  to 
question  them.  He  says,  that  '  upon  the  matter  I  referred 
him  twice  to  Sir  John  Lambe,  and  that  at  the  second  time 
he  found  the  plot  was  to  make  him  an  instrument  about  the 
rails,  which  he  absolutely  refused/  I  did  refer  him  (and  it 
may  be  twice)  to  Sir  John  Lambe ;  but  if  Sir  John l  spake  to 
him  about  the  rails,  he  had  no  commission  from  me  so  to  do. 
I  understood  Mr.  Aske  too  well,  to  offer  to  make  him  an 
instrument  in  such  a  business.  "  His  zeal  would  have  set  the 
rails  on  fire,  so  soon  as  ever  he  had  come  near  them f." 

Next  he  says,  '  that  Mr.  Newcommin  was  indicted,  as  is 
aforesaid,  and  that  indictment  found  :  that  letters  missive 
were  sent  for  him  and  his  wife,  by  Stockdall/  If  letters 
missive  by  Stockdall,  then  they  were  sent  by  the  High  Com 
mission,  whose  joint  act  cannot  be  charged  upon  me :  and  if 
1  ['  Sir  John '  in  margin.  Originally  '  he '] 

d  [Sir  Francis   Crawley.     He  was          e  [Sir  Rich.  Hutton,  one  of  the  Jus- 
impeached  by  the  Commons  in  1641,  tices  of  Common  Pleas.     He  was  the 
for  the  part  he  took  respecting  ship-  author  of  'Reports.'  (Wood,  Ath.  Ox. 
money.     See  Rushworth's  Collections,  iii.  26.)] 
vol.  v.  p.  329.]  {  Frigidius  dictum. — W.  S.  A.  C. 


Dio  anything  can  be  proved,  why  is  not  Stockdall  produced?    He 

1  °*  says,  '  that  he  went  into  Holland  to  avoid  the  oath  ex  officio. 
The  oath  ex  officio  was  then  the  common,  and,  for  aught  I  yet 
know,  then  the  legal  course  of  that  court :  so  I  could  not 
help  the  tender  of  that  oath  unto  them,  had  they  stayed  and 
appeared.  But  the  truth  is,  he  was  too  guilty  to  appear ;  for 
his  wife  was  a  separatist,  and  himself  confesses,  that  she  came 
not  to  the  prayers  of  the  Church.  And  as  for  him,  I  ever 
found  him  the  great  maintainer  of  all  wilful  opposition  against 
the  Church.  He  further  says,  he  came  to  me  to  Croydon ; 
and  '  that  there  I  told  him,  he  might  have  put  the  indictment 
against  Mr.  Newcommin  in  his  pocket/  Indeed,  my  Lords, 
if  I' did  say  so,  I  think  I  spake  it  truly.  For  if  he  had  borne 
any  respect  to  the  reputation  of  the  clergy,  I  think  he  might 
have  pocketed  it  for  one  sessions,  without  any  prejudice  at 
all  to  the  law  or  anything  else.  God  knows,  this  is  often  done. 
And  if  thereupon  I  added,  as  Mr.  Aske  says  I  did,  '  that  if 
he  were  so  strictly  set  against  churchmen  in  the  temporal 
courts,  he  must  look  for  as  strict  proceedings  in  the  High 
Commission/  I  see  no  great  crime  in  it ;  for  we  are  as  strictly 
bound  to  prosecute  in  the  one,  as  he  was  in  the  other.  And 
if  his  clerk,  as  he  says,  '  was  attached,  who  read l  the  indict 
ment/  yet  it  is  not  said  by  himself  that  he  was  attached  for 
reading  it.  "  And  if  it  wrere  so,  that  some  jurors  were 
attached,  and  not  Mr.  Aske's  clerk  only,  (as  Mr.  Browne 
pressed  it  in  the  sum  of  his  charge,)  yet  the  answer  comes  all 
to  one.  For  no  witness  says,  these  jurors  were  called  into 
the  High  Commission  for  beiri^  jurors,  or  discharging  that 
legal  duty.  And  then  I  hope  a  man's  being  of  a  jury  shall 
not  excuse  him  for&  answering  any  crime  in  any  court  that 
hath  power  to  call  him :  provided  he  be  not  called  off  at  the 
time  of  his  service,  or  while  he  is  under  the  privilege  of  that 
court  in  which  he  is  a  juror.  And  according  to  this  I 
gave  Mr.  Browne  my  answer2.  And  howsoever,  the  attach 
ment  goes,  of  course,  out  from  the  Commission,  and  not 
from  me3." 

1  ['  who  read '  in  marg.     Originally,  '  for  reading '] 

2  ['  And  if  it  were  .  .  .  answer.'  on  opposite  page.] 

3  [Some  words  here  erased  so  as  to  be  illegible.] 

£  'from' 


The  second  charge  of  this  dayb  was  about  the  censure  Die 
which  fell  on  the  inhabitants  of  Beckington  in  Somersetshire, 
about  their  refusing  to  remove  the  communion-table  according 
to  the  order  of  their  diocesan1 :  about  which  were  produced 
three  witnesses,  to  whos«  evidence  I  shall  answer  in  order. 
262  1.  The  first  was  Wi.  Longe,  who  says  he  was  foreman  of  the 
jury,  when  these  men  were  indicted  for  a  riot  ;  and  that,  '  as 
he  conceives,  the  parson  spake  with  the  judge  about  it,  which 
caused  a  sudden  verdict/  The  parson  of  the  place  spake 
with  the  judge,  and  he  conceives  that  produced  a  sudden 
verdict.  First,  he  doth  but  conceive  so,  and  that  can  make  no 
proof.  If  it  did  make  proof,  'tis  only  against  the  parson,  not 
against  me.  And  if  the  parson  speaking  of  it  did  say,  (as 
Mr.  Longe  affirms  he  did,)  '  that  this  riot  was  like  a  Walden- 
sian  or  Swisserland  commotion/  he  must  answer  for  his  own 
distempered  language ;  me  it  cannot  concern. 

2.  The  second  witness  was  George  Longe.  He  says,  '  the 
Bp.  of  BathJ  commanded  the  communion-table  to  be  removed, 
and  set  at  the  upper  end  of  the  chancel ;  that  the  church 
wardens  refusing,  were  excommunicated/  But  he  says 
withal,  that  they  appealed  to  the  Arches,  and  had  remedy. 
Then  he  adds  further,  '  that  the  Bp.  proceeded  again,  but 
the  churchwardens  would  not  remove  it,  saying  it  was  an 
innovation,  and  against  law/  But,  my  Lds.,  'tis  neither  : 
and  therefore  these  churchwardens  were  in  a  great  contempt 
against  their  Bishop,  to  the  ill  (128)  example  of  all  that 
country.  And  that  it  is  no  innovation  against  law,  appears 
by  the  Injunctions  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  where  it  is  com 
manded  expressly  to  be  set  there.  The  words  are :  '  The 
holy  table  in  every  church '  (not  cathedrals  only)  '  shall  be 
decently  made,  and  set  in  the  place  where  the  altar  stoodV 
Now  all  men  know,  that  with  us  in  England  the  altar  stood 
north  and  south,  at  the  upper  end  of  the  chancel ;  and  to  set 
it  east  and  west  had  been  cross  the  place  where  the  altar 
stood,  and  not  in  it.  And  this  being  law  in  the  beginning  of 
the  Reformation,  cannot  now  be  an  innovation. 

h  [The  Lords' Journals  mention  only  ject  are  preserved  in  MSS.    Lamb., 

the  case  of  Colchester  as  entered  into  numb.  943,  pp.  481 — 505.] 

on  this  day]  J    [William  Pierce.] 

1  [This   case  is  stated   in  full   in  k  Tnjunct.  of  Q.  Eliz.  fine.    [Tn  Wil- 

Prynne's  Cant.   Doom,   pp.  97 — 101  :  kins'  Concilia,  torn.  iv.  p.  188.] 
and  several  papers  on  the  same  sub- 


*J'°  When  they  came  to  me  again,  (as  they  say  they  did,)  if  I 

then  told  them,  '  they  deserved  to  be  laid  by  the  heels  for 
the  contempt  of  their  Bp. ;'  under  favour,  my  Lords,  I  spake 
truth.  And  give  me  leave,  I  beseech  you,  to  tell  you  this : 
it  began  to  be  a  general  complaint,  not  of  the  Bishop  of  Bath 
only,  but  of  other  bishops  also,  that  they  could  do  little  or 
no  service  in  their  several  countries,  by  reason  of  the  inhi 
bitions  which  issued  out  of  my  courts  to  stay  their  proceed 
ings.  And  I  wanted  no  good  friends  in  Court  to  tell  the 
King  as  much,  when  anything  was  complained  of.  By  this 
I  was  brought  into  great  straits :  deny  appeals  I  might  not ; 
frequent  granting  in  my  courts  destroyed  in  a  manner  the 
Bps'.  jurisdictions.  In  this  difficulty,  seeing  the  wilfulness 
of  these  men,  and  knowing  they  had  received  full  benefit  by 
their  appeal  once  already  in  the  same  case;  I  did  refuse  to 
hear  any  more  of  it,  (unless  there  were  new  matter ;)  but  yet 
left  them  free  to  appeal  to  the  delegates. 

For  Mr.  Hughes1,  the  parson  there,  if  '  he  gave  ill  words, 
or  laid  violent  hands  on  any  of  his  neighbours/  it  concerns 
not  me  :  let  him  answer  for  what  he  hath  said,  or  done.  "Tis 
further  said,  that  '  Mr.  Hughes  was  with  me  at  Windsor,  and 
had  letters  from  me  to  the  Lord  Chief  Justice  Finch/  But 
this  witness  delivers  not  this  upon  his  own  knowledge;  I 
sent  no  letter  by  him,  nor  did  he  see  me  send  by  any  other : 
so  this  is  merely  a  report,  and  he  doth  not  so  much  as  tell 
from  whom.  Yea,  but  then  he  says,  '  that  Mr.  Morgan/ 
a  man  inward  with  the  judge,  '  told  him,  that  the  judge  told  263 
him,  that  the  little  man  had  put  a  spoke  in  their  cart ;  and 
thereupon/  as  he  conceives,  '  the  petty  jury  was  changed.' 
Here  are,  if  your  Lordships  mark  them,  two  great  proofs. 
The  one  is  the  witness's  report  of  Mr.  Morgan's  report,  that 
the  judge  had  said  so  of  me :  but  why  is  not  Mr.  Morgan 
produced  to  clear  this?  The  other  is  not  the  knowledge, 
but  the  conceit  only  of  the  witness  :  '  he  conceives/  which,  I 
am  confident,  cannot  sway  with  your  Lps.  for  a  proof. 
"  Besides,  were  Mr.  Morgan  never  so  inward  with  that  judge, 
yet  it  follows  not  that  he  must  know  all.  And  if  that  judge 

1  [Alexander  Huish  was  the  name  him,  and  mentions,  among  other 
of  the  Incumbent.  Wood  (Ath.  Ox.  things,  that  he  assisted  Walton  in 
iii.  812)  gives  a  favourable  notice  of  the  Polyglott  Bible.] 


did  mean  me,  (for  name  me  he  did  not,)  he  did  me  the  more  ®'ie 
wrong.     For  I  never  desired  anything  of  any  judge,  him  or  " 
other,  but  what  was  according  to  law.     Nay,  I  so  expressed 
myself,  as  that,  if  by  mistake  or  misinformation  I  had  desired 
anything  which  was  not  according  to  law,  I  humbly  desired 
my  motion  might  be,  as  if  it  had  never  been  made1." 

3.  The  third  witness  is  Mr.  John  Ashm.  That  which  this 
gentleman  says  is,  ( that  Sir  John  Lambe  told  that  man  which 
came  about  that  business2  [he]  could  have  no  appeal  ad 
mitted  without  me  ;  and  that  if  he  would  be  so  troublesome, 
he  should  be  laid  by  the  heels/  I  have3  given  your  Lps.  an 
account,  why  he  could  not  have  an  appeal  without  me :  he 
had  had  the  benefit  of  an  appeal  before  in  the  same  cause. 
And  for  this  witness,  he  delivers  no  knowledge  of  his  own ; 
but  only  he  says,  the  man  employed  related  it  to  him :  so  'tis 
a  relation,  no  proof.  He  says,  '  the  penance  was  enjoined 
them  in  three  churches0/  And  truly,  my  Lds.,  their  disobe 
dience  to  their  Bishop  was  great ;  but  if  the  penance  enjoined 
were  too  heavy,  it  was  the  act  of  their  own  Bp.,  not  mine. 
Then  he  says,  '  that  the  Ld.  Finch  told  him,  another  power 
ful  hand  was  upon  him,  intimating  me/  First,  this  is  no 
knowledge  of  the  witness,  but  a  speech  of  the  Lord  Finch. 
Secondly,  if  the  Ld.  Finch  did  say  so,  of  a  powerful  hand, 
he  wronged  me  much,  but  himself  more,  to  confess  he  could 
be  drawn  awry  in  judgment.  Thirdly,  this  witness  says  not 
that  he  named  me,  but  that  he  ( intimated  me :'  I  pray  your 
Lps'.  judgment,  what  a  forward  witness4  this  man  is,  that 
can  upon  oath  deliver  what  is  intimated,  and  of  whom. 

He  says  further,  '  that  upon  petition  to  Sir  Wi.  Portman, 
for  some  assistance,  the  Bishop  of  Bath  laid  all  upon  me ; 
and  that  when  himself  came  to  me  at  the  Tower,  since  my 
restraint,  I  told  him  the  Bp.  of  Bath  did  like  an  obedient 
Bp.  to  his  Metropolitan/  For  this,  my  Lords,  here  is  no 
proof  that  the  Bishop  laid  this  business  upon  me,  but  Sir 
W.  Portmaii's  report.  Sir  William  is  a  worthy  gentleman ; 

1  ['it  follows  .  .  .  made.' on  opposite  page.] 

2  ['told  .  .  .  business/  in  marg.   Originally,  'told  him  he'] 

3  (Originally  written  '  This  was ']  *  ['  witness '  interlined.] 

m  [Lord  of  the  Manor  of  Beckington,          n  [Beckington,  Frome  Selwood,  and 
nd  M.P.  for  Westbury.]  SS.  Peter  and  Paul  in  Bath.] 


Die  why  is  not  he  produced  ?     Why  is  not  the  Bishop,  that  is 

said  to  lay  all  upon  me,  brought  into  the  court,  that  he  may 
clear  himself  and  me,  if  he  said  it  not ;  or  that  I  may  make 
him  ashamed,  if  he   said  it  ?     For  'tis  confessed,  that  in  the 
first  business,  the  churchwardens  had  remedy  by  their  appeal 
to  me;  but  that  then  the   (129)  Bishop  began  again,  as  the 
former  witness  declared :  nor  knew  I  anything  of  this  busi 
ness  till  the  appeal  came.    As  for  my  answer  to  himself,  that, 
under  favour,  is  quite  mistaken :  for  I  did  not  say,  that  in 
this  particular,  but  that  in  his   general  proceedings  in  his  261 
diocese,  '  the  Bishop  of  Bath  carried  himself  like  an  obedient 
Bp.  to  his  Metropolitan/     Nor  can  my  words  be  drawn  to 
mean  this  particular  :  for  how  could  I  say,  that  in  this  parti 
cular  he  carried  himself  like  an  obedient  Bishop  to  me,  when 
after  remedy  given  to  these  men  by  their  first  appeal  into  my 
court,  he  began  with   them    again   upon  the  same   cause? 
Besides,  my  Lords,  this  is  not  the  first  time  Mr.  Ash  hath 
mistaken  me.     ee  Mr.  Browne,  in   summing  up  this  charge 
against  me,  falls  twice  very  heavily  upon  this  business  of 
Beckington.     First,  for  the  point  of  religion :  and  there  he 
quoted  a  passage  out  of  my  speech  in  the   S  tar-Chamber, 
•where  '  I  do  reserve  the  indifferency  of  the  standing  of  the 
communion-table  either  way0/  and  yet,  saith  he,  they  were 
thus  heavily  sentenced  for  that  which  I  myself  hold  indif 
ferent.     But  first,  this  sentence  was  laid  upon  them  by  their 
own  bishop,  not  by  me.     Secondly,  the  more  indifferent  the 
thing  was,  the  greater  was  their  contumacy  to  disobey  their 
ordinary :  and  had  it  riot  been  a  thing  so  indifferent,  and 
without  danger  of  advancing  Popery,  would  Queen  Elizabeth, 
who  banished  Popery  out  of  the  kingdom,  have  endured  it 
in  her  own  chapel  all  her  time  ?     Thirdly,  the  heaviness  of 
the  sentence  so  much  complained  of  was  but  to  confess  their 
contumacy  in  three  churches  of  the  diocese,  to  example  other 
men's  obedience.     Secondly,  for  the  same  point,  as  it  con 
tained  matter  against  law,  I  answered  Mr.  Browne  as  I  had 
before  answered  the  Lords  l  P." 

1  ['  Mr.  Browne,  in  summing  up  ...  Lords.'  on  opposite  page. 

0  [Speech  against  Burton,  Prynne,      See  Works,  vol.  vi.] 
and  Bastwick,]  p.  54  [of  orig.  Edit,;          P  P.  128  [of  orig.  MS.     See  above, 
p.  180  in  marg.  in  this  present  reprint,      p.  121.] 


The  third  charge  was  about  certain  houses  given  to  S.  Ed-  Die 
mund's,  Lombard-street,,  where  old  Mr.  Pagett  is  parson 


The  witnesses  are  two. 

1.  The  first  is  Mr.  Symms  ;  who  says,  '  that  after  a1  verdict, 
Mr.  Pagett,  the  incumbent,  upon  a  pretence,  that  these  tene 
ments,  were  church-land,  got  a  reference  to  the  Ld.  Bishop 
of  London,  then  Lord  Treasurer,  and  myself/     My  Lords, 
we  procured  not  the  reference  :  but  when  it  was  brought  to 
us  under  the  King's  hand,  we  could  not  refuse  to  sit  upon  it. 
Upon  full  hearing,  we  were  satisfied  that  the  cause  was  riot 
rightly  stated,  and  therefore  we  referred  them  to  the  law 
again   for   another    trial;    and  for    costs  to  the    Barons   of 
that  court.     "  And  this  was  the  answer  which  I  gave  to  Mr. 
Browne,  when  he  instanced  in  this  case2."     He  says,  '  the 
houses  were   given   to   superstitious  uses/     But  possessions 
are  not  to  be  carried  away  for  saying  so.     If  men  may  get 
land  from  others,   by  saying  it  was  given  to  superstitious 
uses,  they  may  get  an  easy  purchase.     And   Mr.  Symms  is 
here  in  his  own  case  :  but  whether  the  houses  were  given  to 
superstitious  uses  or  not,  is  the  thing  to  be  tried  in  law,  and 
not  to  be  pleaded  to  us3.     He  complains,  '  that  I  would  not 
hear  his  petition   alone  :'  and  surely,  my  Lords,  I  had  no 
reason,  since4  it  was  referred  to  another  with  me.     And  yet 
I  see,  though  I  was  not  in  the  reference  alone,  nor  would 
hear  it  alone,  yet  I  must  be  alone  in  the  treason.     And  here 
I  desired  that  Mr.  Pagett,  the  incumbent,  might  be  heard. 

2.  The  other  witness  was  Mr.  Barnard.     He  says,  he  was 
present  at  the  hearing,  '  and  that  Mr.  Symms  said  he  was 
undone,  if  he  must  go  to  a  new  trial/     But,  my  Lords,  so 
many  men  say,  that  by  their  troublesomeness  in  lawsuits  go 

265  about  to  undo  others.  He  says,  'that  Mr.  Pagett  named  his 
own  referees/  If  that  be  so,  'tis  no  fault  of  mine.  He  says, 
'  the  reference  was  made  to  us  only  to  certify,  not  to  make 
any  order  in  it/  If  this  be  so,  here's  no  proof  so  much 

'  a  '  interlined.]  2  ['  And  this  .  .  .  case.'  in  marg.] 

'  to  us.'  originally  written,  '  here.'] 

'  reason,  since'  originally  'reason,  for  since  '] 

i  [Ephraim    Pagit,   or   Paget,  the  Kent,   where   he  died,   according   to 

author  of  the    '  Heresiography.'     He  Wood,  in  1647.    In  the  Preface  to  the 

was  so  molested  in  the  beginning  of  sixth  edition  of  the  '  Heresiography,' 

the   Rebellion,  that  he  gave  up  his  he  is  said  to  have  died  in  1650,  aged 

living,   and   retired  to  Deptford,  in  84.  (Wood,  Ath.  Ox.  iii.  210,  211).] 


Dic.  as  offered,  that  we  did  not  certify,  as  we  were  required,  and 

then  had  power  given  to  order  it,  which  we  did.  And  he 
confesses  the  counsel  on  both  sides  had  full  hearing  before 
aught  was  done. 

IV.  The  fourth  charge  of  this  day  was  concerning  the  impri 
sonment  of  one  Grafton,  an  upholster  in  London.  The 
witnesses  three  ;  of  which,  — 

1.  The  first  is  Grafton,  in  his  own  cause;  and  His  much  if 
he  cannot  tell  a  plausible  tale  for  himself.     He  says  first, 
'that  twelve  years  ago  he  was   committed,  and  fined  fifty 
pounds,   by  other    commissioners/     By  others,   my   Lords; 
therefore  not  by  me  ;  and  an  act  of  the  High  Commission, 
by  his  own  words,  it  appears  to  be1.     He  says,  '  he  was  con 
tinued  in  prison  by  my  procurement,  as  he  verily  believes/ 
First,  '  as  he  verily  believes  '  is  no  proof.     And  the  ground  of 
his  belief  is  as  weak  ;  for  he  gives  no  reason  of  it  but  this,  '  that 
Dr.  Ryves,  the  King's  Advocate1,  spake  with  the  Barons/ 
but  he  doth  not  say  about  what,  or  from  whom2.     He  adds 
further,  (  that  Mr.  Ingram,  keeper  of  the  Fleet,  would  not 
give  way  to  his  release3,  notwithstanding  the  Barons'  orders, 
till  he  heard  from  me/     Here's  no  man  produced,  that  heard 
Mr.  Ingram  say  so,  nor  is  Mr.  Ingram  himself  brought  to 
testify.     Lastly,  he  says,  '  that  he  then  made  means  in  court, 
and  so  repaired  to  the  Barons  again,  but  all  in  vain  ;  and  that 
Baron  Trevor8  cried  out,  'O  the  Bishop!    O  the  Bishop!' 
First,   here's  a  confession  of  means  in  court  made  to  the 
judges;  so  belike,  they  may  have  means  made  to  them,  so  it 
be  not  by  me.     For  the  particular,  I  did  humbly  desire  the 
Baron,  being  then  present,  might  be  asked.     He  was  asked  ; 
he  blushed  and  fumbled,  the  Lords  laughed,  and  I  could  not 
hear  what  he  said. 

2.  The   second  witness  was   Mr.  Lenthall  ;    but  he  said 
nothing  but  that  '  there  was  an  order  for  Grafton's  liberty/ 
which  is  not  denied. 

1  ['be.'  originally  written  'me.']  2  ['but  .  .  .  whom.'  in  margin.] 

3  ['  release,'  originally  '  release,  till  '] 

r   [Thomas  Ryves  ;   he   was   after-  been  already  fined,  on  his  impeach- 

wards  employed  by  King  Charles  at  ment  by  the  Commons,  though  per- 

the  treaty  of  Newport.     See  a  notice  mitted  to  continue  in  his  office.     See 

of  his  Life  in  Wood,  Ath.  Ox.  iii.  304.]  the  articles  against  him  in  Rushworth's 

•  [Sir  Thomas  Trevor,  one  of  the  Collections,  vol.  v.  pp.  339  seq.] 
Barons  of  the  Exchequer.     He  had 


3.  The  third  was  Mr.  Eivett.  He  says,  '  that  Mr.  Ingram  Die 
said  that  Grafton  was  a  Brownist,  and  must  be  brought  into 
the  Fleet  again,  because  he  did  much  hurt  among  the  King's 
subjects/  This  is  a  bare  report  of  a  speech  (130)  of  Mr. 
Ingram;  it  no  way  concerns  me.  And  a  separatist  he  is 
from  the  Church  of  England  ;  but  whether  a  Brownist  or  no 
I  cannot  tell,  there  are  so  many  sects,  (God  help  us !)  And 
much  harm  he  hath  done  among  weak  people  ;  for  most  true 
it  is,  which  S.Cyril1  observes,  TIpoeToi/jid^ei,  6 
o"%icr fiara  T<£>V  \au>v,  'iva  evTrapaSe/cros  ^evrfrau  o 
'  That  the  Devil  prepares  these  schismatical  separations,  that 
so  much  the  more  easily  the  enemy  may  be  received/  As 
for  this  man,  he  was  in  his  way2  cunning  enough;  for,  under 
pretence  that  he  suffered  by  me,  he  got  Madame  Vantlett, 
and  other  of  the  French,  to  negotiate  with  the  Queen's 
Majesty  in  his  behalf.  And  this  I  found,  that  sometimes, 
when  her  Majesty  knew  not  of  it,  they  sent  to  the  Barons  for 
favour  for  him.  "  And  yet  I  never  heard  that  Baron  Trevor 
ever  cried  out,  '  O  the  French !  O  the  French ! '  Nor  can 
I  tell  what  stopped  his  mouth  in  this  cry,  and  opened  it  so 
266  wide  in  the  other,  when  we  moved  to  defend  ourselves  and 
our  proceedings.  Where,  I  humbly  desire,  this  passage  of  the 
law  may  be  considered.  In  the  case  of  depraving  the 
Common  Prayer-book,  (so  much  scorned  and  vilified  at  this 
day,)  and  for  not  coming  to  church,  the  words  of  the  law 
are, — ( For  due  execution  hereof,  the  Queen's  most  excellent 
Majesty,  the  Lords  Temporal,  and  all  the  Commons  in  this 
present  Parliament  assembled,  do  in  God's  name  earnestly 
require  and  charge  all  the  archbishops,  and  bishops,  and" 
other  ordinaries,  that  they  shall  endeavour  to  the  uttermost 
of  their  knowledge  that  the  due  and  true  execution  hereof 
may  be  had  throughout  their  dioceses  and  charges,  as  they 
will  answer  before  God/  &c.u  Now,  if  I  do  not  this,  here's 
an  apparent  breach  of  the  law ;  and  if  I  do  it  against  this 
common  and  great  depraver  of  this  book,  then  the  judge, 
who  by  this  law  should  assist  me,  cries,  '  O  the  Bishop  ! '  And 

1  [Originally,  « S.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem '] 

2  ['for  most.  ..way'  on  opposite  page.     It  was  originally  written,  'as  I 
have  been  afterwards  informed,  and  cunning  enough  he  was;'] 

*  Cyril.  Hierosol.  Cateche.  xv.  [§  9,  u  1  Eli?:,  c.  2.  [§  15-1 

p.  227.     Paris,  1720.] 


Die  this  answer  I  gave  Mr.  Browne,  when  he  summed  his  charge 

Quinto-       against  me1." 

V.          The  fifth  charge  of  this  day  was  Mr.  John  Ward's  case,  in 
a  suit  about  simony  in  the  High  Commission. 

He  says  (for  he  also  is  in  his  own  cause),  'that  upon  a 
pretence  of  a  lapse  by  simony,  I  procured  a  presentation  from 
the  King  to  the  church  of  DunningtonV  His  Majesty 
trusted  me  with  the  titles,  which  did  accrue  to  him  in  that 
kind ;  and  because  simony  had  been  so  rife,  commanded  me 
to  be  careful  I  might  not  betray  this  trust ;  and  therefore, 
the  simony  being  offered  to  be  proved,  I  procured  his  Ma 
jesty's  presentation  for  trial  of  the  title.  And  this,  I  conceive, 
was  no  offence;  though  this  be  that  which  he  calls  'the 
heaviness  of  my  hand  upon  him.'  He  further  says,  ( that  I 
sent  to  the  Bishop  of  Norwichw  to  admit  the  King's  Clerk, 
the  church  being  void,  7  Junii,  1638.'  Nor  do  I  yet  see,  my 
Lords,  what  crime  it  is  in  me,  trusted  especially  as  before, 
to  send  to  the  bishop  to  admit,  when  the  church  is  void. 
Many  lay  patrons  do  that  upon  allegation  of  simony,  before 
proof2;  "and  Mr.  Bland,  produced  as  a  witness  also,  says 
that  the  Lord  Goring x  prevailed  with  the  Ld.  Bishop  of 
Norwich  not  to  admit.  And  I  hope  an  Archbp.,  and 
trusted  therein  by  his  Majesty,  may  as  lawfully  write  to  the 
ordinary  for  admission  of  the  King's  Clerk,  as  any  lay  lord 
may  write  against  it.  But  Mr.  Ward  says  nothing  to-3  this 
of  the  Lord  Goring;  but  adds,  that  Sir  John  Rowse  ^  pre 
vented  this  admission  by  a  Ne  admit tas,  Junii  12;  and  that 
thereupon  I  said,  '  it  was  to  no  purpose  for  us  to  sit  there,  if, 
after  a  long  trial  and  judgment  given,  all  might  be  stopped.' 
If  I  did  say  so,  I  think  it  is  a  manifest  truth  that  I  spake ; 
for  it  were  far  better  not  to  have  simony  tried  at  all  in  ecclesi 
astical  courts,  than  after  a  long  trial  to  have  it  called  off  into 
Westminster  Hall,  "  to  the  double  charge  and  trouble  of  the 

1  ['proceedings.     Where/.  .  .  me.' on  opposite  page.] 

2  ['proof;'  orig.  'proof.     He  adds,  that  Sir  John  Rowse'  (as  below  in  text.)] 

3  ['  to '  originally  '  in '] 

v  [Ezekiel  Wright  was  presented  by  w  [Rich.  Montagu.] 

the  Crown  to  Dennington,  (which  is  x  [George  Goring,  first  Baron  Go- 

the  correct  name  of  the  place,)  April  3,  ring.] 

1637.     The  living  is  stated  to  have  >'  [Sir  John  Rowse,  of  Rowsclench, 

beeii  vacant   by  reason   of   Simony,  in  Warwickshire.] 
(Uymcr,  Fml  IX.  ii.  143.)] 


subject.     But  if  the  law  will  have  it  otherwise,  we  cannot  Die 
help  that.     Nor  is  this  expression  of  mine  any  violation  of  ^uinto- 
the  law." 

Then  he  says,  a  ( letter  was  directed  from  the  Court  of  the 
High  Commission  to  the  judges,  to  revoke  the  Ne  admittas ; 
and  that  I  was  forward  to  have  the  letter  sent/  How  for 
ward  soever  I  was,  yet  it  is  confessed  the  letter  was  sent  by 
the  court,  not  by  me.  And  let  the  letter  be  produced,  it 
shall  therein  appear,  that  it  was  not  to  revoke  the  Ne  admittas, 
267  but  to  desire  the  judges  to  consider,  whether  it  were  not  fit 
to  be  revoked,  considering  the  church  was  not  void  till  Junii 
14.  And  it  hath  been  usual  in  that  court  to  write  or  send 
some  of  their  body  to  the  temporal  judges,  where  they  con 
ceive  there  hath  been  a  misinformation  or  a  mistake  in  the 
cause,  the  judges  being  still  free  to  judge  according  to  law, 
both  for  the  one  and  the  other.  And  here  he  confesses  the 
writ  of  Ne  admittas  was  revoked  by  three  judges,  and  there 
fore,  I  think,  legally. 

But  here  he  hopes  he  hath  found  me  in  a  contradiction. 
Tor  when  I  writ  to  the  Bishop  of  Norwich,  Junii  7,  1638, 
I  there  said  the  church  was  void ;  whereas  this  letter  to  the 
judges  says  it  was  not  void  till  Junii  14.'  But  here  is  110 
contradiction  at  all ;  for  after  the  trial  past,  and  the  simony 
proved,  the  church  is  void  to  so  much  as  the  bishop's  giving 
of  institution  ;  and  so  I  writ  Junii  7.  But  till  the  sentence 
was  pronounced  in  open  court,  and  read,  the  church  was  not 
void  as  touching  those  legalities,  which,  as  I  humbly  conceive, 
do  not  till  then  take  place  in  Westminster  Hall ;  and  the 
reading  of  the  sentence  was  not  till  Junii  14.  However,  if 
I  were  mistaken  in  my  own  private  letter  to  the  Bishop,  yet 
that  was  better  thought  on  in  the  letter  from  the  High-Com 
mission  to  the  judges.  He  says  lastly,  '  that  upon  a  Quare 
impedit  after  taken  forth,  it  was  found  that  the  King  had  no 
right/  Why,  my  Lords,  if  different  courts  judge  differently 
of  simony,  I  hope  that  shall  not  be  imputed  to  me.  In  the 
court  where  I  sat,  I  judged  according  to  my  conscience,  and 
the  law,  and  the  proof,  as  it  appeared  to  me.  And  for  Dr. 
Reeves2  his  letter,  which  he  says  '  was  sent  to  the  cursitor  to 

e  [The  name  is  thus  spelt  in  the  MS.     The  person  meant  is  Dr.  Ryves, 
mentioned  above,  p.  126,  note  r.] 

LAUD. — VOL.  iv.  K 


Die  stop  the  Ne  admittas,  let  Dr.  Reeves  answer  it :  the  witness 

himself  confesses,  that  Dr.  Reeves  says  the  command  to  the 
cursitor  was  from  the  Lord  Keeper,  not  from  me.  "And  here 
ends  the  treason  against  Mr.  Ward ;  and  till  now  I  did  not 
think  any  could  have  been  committed  against  a  minister." 
VI.  Then  followed  the  case  of  Ferdinando  Adamsa  his  excom 
munication,  and  the  suits  which  followed  it :  as  it  will  appear 
inb  the  witnesses  following,  which  were  four. 

(131)  1.  The  first  was  Mr.  Hen.  Dade,  the  commissary 
then  before  whom  the  cause  began ;  and  he  confesses  *  he 
did  excommunicate  Adams  for  not  blotting  out  a  sentence  of 
Scripture,  which  the  said  Adams  had  caused  to  be  written 
upon  the  church  wall,  as  in  many  churches  sentences  of 
Scripture  are  written.'  But  he  tells  your  Lps.  too,  that  this 
sentence  was, '  My  house  shall  be  called  the  house  of  prayer ; 
but  ye  have  made  it  a  den  of  thieves0/  The  commissary's 
court  was  kept  (as  usually  it  is)  at  or  toward  the  west  end  of 
the  church;  and  just  over  the  court  Adams  had  written  this 
sentence  upon  the  wall,  merely  to  put  a  scorn  and  a  scandal 
(though  I  hope  an  unjust  one)  upon  that  court.  "  He  was 
commanded  to  blot  it  out.  He  would  not,  because  it  was 
Scripture;  as  if  a  man  might  not  revile  and  slander,  nay, 
speak  treason  too,  (if  he  will  be  so  wicked,)  and  all  in  Scrip 
ture  phrase :  witness  that  lewd  speech  lately  uttered,  '  To 
your  tents,  O  Israel d/  &c."  Upon  this  he  was  excommuni 
cated,  and  I  cannot  but  think  he  well  deserved  it.  For  the 
suit  which  followed  against  Mr.  Dade  in  the  Star-Chamber; 
the  motion,  '  that  Mr.  Attorney  would  leave  him  to  the  268 
common  prosecutor,  and  not  follow  it  in  his  own  name/ 
himself  confesses  was  made  in  open  court  by  Mr.  Bierly,  and 
that  from  me  he  had  no  instructions  at  all. 

2.  The  second  witness  is  Adams,  in  his  own  cause.  To 
the  place  of  Scripture  I  have  spoken  already.  And  the  next 
that  he  says  is,  'that  Sir  Nath.  Brent,  in  my  visitation, 
commanded  the  setting  of  the  communion-table  at  the  upper 
end  of  the  chancel ;  that  upon  his  not  blotting  out  the 
passage  of  Scripture,  he  had  an  action,  and  that  his  solicitor 

a  [Adams  was  one  of  the  church-  b  'by' 

wardens  of  S.  Mary-at-Tower,  Ipswich.  c  S.  Mat.  xxi.  13. 

See  more  particulars  of  this  case  in  d  1  Reg.  xii.  16. 
Prynne,  Cant.  Doom,  p.  101.] 


was  committed  by  J.  Jones,  till  he  relinquished  his  suit/    In  Die 
all  this  there  is  not  one  word  of  anything  that  I  did.    And  for  Qainto- 
that  which  Sir  Nath.  Brent  did  about  placing  the  communion 
table,  'tis  answered  before e.     He  says  also,  '  that  when  he 
saw  that   he  must  prosecute    his   suit    against  Commissary 
Dade  in  his  own  name,  he  left  the  kingdom/     And  surely, 
my  Lords,  if  he  would  leave  the  kingdom,  rather  than  prose 
cute  his  cause  in  his  own  name,  'tis  more  than  a  sign,  that  his 
cause  was  not  very  good. 

3.  The  third  witness  was  Mr.  Cockshot,  one  of  Mr.  At 
torney  Banks  his  servants.  He  says,  '  that  Adams  moved 
him,  and  he  Mr.  Attorney,  and  that  thereupon  Mr.  Attorney 
gave  his  warrant  against  Dade/  By  which  your  Lps.  may 
see  how  active  Mr.  Cockshot  was1  against  a  church-officer, 
and  in  so  foul  a  scandal.  He  says  also, '  that  Mr.  Dade  came 
to  Mr.  Attorney,  and  told  him  that  I  did  not  think  it  fit  a 
prosecution  in  such  a  cause  should  be  followed  in  Mr.  At 
torney's  name/  First,  'tis  true,  I  did  not  think  it  fit ;  nor 
did  Mr.  Attorney  himself,  when,  upon  Mr.  Bierlye's  motion, 
he  fully  understood  it.  Secondly,  the  cause  being  so  scan 
dalous  to  a  church-officer,  I  conceive  I  might  so  say  to  Mr. 
Dade,  or  any  other,  without  offence.  But  then  thirdly, 
here's  not  one  word  that  I  sent  Mr.  Dade  to  Mr.  Attorney 
about  it :  he  came  and  used  my  name 2,  so  Mr.  Cockshot  says, 
but  not  one  word  that  I  sent  him.  Lastly,  he  says,  '  that 
Mr.  Attorney  told  him  that  I  blamed  him  for  the  business, 
and  that  thereupon  he  chid  this  witness,  and  sent  him  to  me, 
and  that  I  rebuked  him  for  it ;  but  he  particularly  remembers 
not  what  I  said/  Nor  truly,  my  Lords,  do  I  remember  any 
of  this.  But  if  I  did  blame  Mr.  Attorney  for  lending  his 
name  in  such  a  scandalous  cause  as  this,  I  did  (as  I  conceive) 
what  became  me :  and  if  he  chid  his  man,  he  did  what 
became  him :  and  if  I  rebuked  Mr.  Cockshot,  when  he  was 
sent  to  me,  sure  he  deserved  it ;  and  it  seems  it  was  with  110 
great  sharpness,  that  he  cannot  remember  anything  of  it. 
"  And  so  I  answered  Mr.  Browne,  when  he  instanced  in 

1  ['was'  in  margin.]  2  ['and  used  my  name/  in  margin.] 

In  the  second  charge  of  this  day,  p.  128  [of  original  MS.  See  above,  p.  121.] 



Die  4.  The  last  witness  was  Mr.  Pryn,  who  says,  '  no  appeal 

Qumto.  wag  jeft  n^m  ,  But  tha^  under  favour,  cannot  be ;  for,  if  my 
courts  refused  him  (which  is  more  than  I  know),  he  might 
have  appealed  to  the  Delegates.  He  says,  'that  he  advised 
Adams  to  an  action  of  the  case ;  that  he  blamed  Lechford  for 
deserting  the  suit;  arid  that  he  advised  him  to  go  to  Mr. 
Attorney/  So  here's  no  assistance  wanting  to  Adams,  but 
the  church-officer,  Mr.  Dade,  must  have  none.  Yet  I  blame 
not  Mr.  Pryn,  because  he  says  he  did  it  as  his  counsel.  He 
says  further,  '  that  when  Adams  was  put  to  prefer  his  bill  in 
his  own  name,  that  then  the  excommunication  was  pleaded  in  269 
bar :'  but  he  doth  not  say  it  was  pleaded  by  me,  or  my 
advice ;  nor  do  I  hear  him  say  it  was  unjustly  pleaded.  Arid 
had  not  Adams  been  wilful,  he  might  have  taken  off  the  ex 
communication,  and  then  proceeded1  as  it  had  pleased  him. 
VII.  Then  the  charge  went  on  against  me,  about  the  stop  of 
Mr.  Bagshawe,  the  Reader  of  the  Middle  Temple f.  The 
witnesses  are  two  lawyers,  which  accompanied  Mr.  Bagshawe 
to  Lambeth,  Mr.  White  e  and  Mr.  Pepys.  They  say,  that 
Mr.  Bagshawe  '  insisted  upon  these  two  points :  first,  that  a 
Parliament  might  be  held  without  bishops ;  and  secondly, 
that  (132)  bishops  might  not  meddle  in  civil  affairs/  My 
Lords,  these  things  are  now  settled  by  an  Act  of  this  Parlia 
ment11;  but  then  they  were  not.  And  I  conceive,  under 
favour,  that  Mr.  Bagshawe  (the  craziness  of  these  times  con 
sidered)  might  have  bestowed  his  time  better  upon  some 
other  argument :  and  sure,  no  man  can 2  think,  that  either 
myself,  or  any  church-governor,  could  approve  his  judgment 
in  that  particular.  And  whereas  they  say,  '  that  the  Lord 
Keeper  Finch  and  the  Lord  Privy  Seal1  told  them,  that  I 

1  ['  proceeded '  originally  written  '  proceeded  to  his '] 

2  ['  can '  in  marg.  ] 

'  [Edward  Bagshawe  began  his  read-  man  of  the  Committee  for  Eeligion. 

ings  at  the  Temple  Feb.  24,  16-ff,  on  He  was  commonly  called    'Century' 

the  statute  of  35  Edw.  III.  cap.  7,  in  White,  from  the  title  of  his  celebrated 

which  he  insisted  on  the  two  points  book, 'The  First  Century  of  Malignant 

mentioned  in  the  text.  He  afterwards  Priests."     (Wood,   Ath.  Ox.   iii.  144, 

joined  the  King's  party,  and  was  com-  145.)] 

mitted  to  prison  by  the  rebels.  (Wood,  h  [16  Car.  I.  cap.  xxvii. :   repealed 

Ath.  Ox.  iii.  619.)]  by  13  Car.  II.  cap.  ii.] 

f  [John  White.     He  was  one  of  the  !    [Henry   Montagu,   first    Earl  of 

feoffees    for   impropriations,   and,  in  Manchester.] 
1640,  M.P.  for  Southwark,  and  Chair- 


was  the  man  that   complained  of  it  to  the  King  and  the  Die 
Lords/  'tis  most  true  I  did  so;    and  I  think  I  had  been  Qumto* 
much  to  blame  if  I  had  not  done  it.   And  if,  when  they  came 
over  to  Lambeth  about  it,  they  heard  me  tell  Mr.  Bagshawe 
(as  they  also  say  they  did)  '  that  he  should  answer  it  in  the 
High-Commission  Court  next  term ;'  I  humbly  conceive  this 
no   great   offence ;  but   out   of  all   question  no  treason,  to 
threaten  the  High-Commission  to  a  Reader  of  the  Inns  of 

The  last  charge  of  this  day  was  concerning  the  Lord  Chief  VIII. 
Justice  Richardson j,  and  what  he  suffered  for  putting  down 
wakes  and  other  disorderly  meetings,  in  Somersetshire,  at  the 
assizes  there  holden  k. 

The  single  witness  to  this  is  Edward  Richardson,  (a  kins 
man  of  the  judge's,  as  I  suppose.)  He  says,  '  that  complaints 
were  made  to  the  a  judge  of  wakes  and  feasts  of  dedication ; 
that  his  Majesty  writ  letters  about  it  to  Sir  Robert  Philips1, 
and  others  :  they  certify  a  command  comes  by  the  Ld.  Keeper 
to  revoke  the  order  next  assizes.  First ;  'tis  not  done.  Then, 
by  command  from  the  Lds.  of  the  Council,  the  judge  upon 
that  second  command  2  revokes  it ;  but  as  'tis  certified,  not 
fitly.'  In  all  this  here's  not  one  word  that  concerns  me. 
Then  he  says,  '  that  upon  this  last  certificate,  the  business 
was  referred  to  the  Lord  Marshal  and  myself,  and  the  judge 
put  from  that  circuit.'  I  cannot  now  remember  what  report 
we  made  :  but  whate'er  it  was,  the  Ld.  Marshal01  agreed  to 
it  as  well  as  'I.  Then  a  letter  of  mine  was  produced  of 
Octob.  4,  1633n.  But  the  letter  being  openly  read,  nothing 
was  found  amiss  in  it.  And,  under  your  Lps'.  favour,  I  am 
still  of  opinion,  that  there  is  no  reason  the  feasts  should  be 
taken  away  for  some  abuses  in  them ;  and  those  such  as  every 
Justice  of  Peace  is  able  by  law  to  remedy,  if  he  will  do  his 

1  ['the 'interlined.] 

2  ['  upon  that  second  command '  in  margin.] 

J   [Sir  Thomas  Eichardson,]  was  Speaker  of  King  James's  first  Par- 

k  [The  documents  relating  to  this  liament,  and  his  son  M.P.   for    the 

question  of  wakes  are  given  at  great  county  in  the  Long  Parliament.] 
length  in  Prynne's  Cant.  Doom,  pp.          m  [Thomas  Howard,  Earl  of  Arun- 

128,  seq.]  del.] 

'  "Mr  Re ' 

[Sir  Robert  had  been  M.P.  for  the  n  [To  the  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells, 
county  of  Somerset,  in  three  Parlia-  It  will  be  found  among  the  Collected 
ments ;  his  father,  it  may  be  added,  Letters  in  vol.  vi.] 


Die  duty.     "  Else  by  this  kind  of  proceeding ],  we  may  go  back 

to  the  old  cure,  and  remedy  drunkenness  by  rooting  out2 
all  the  vines  •  the  wine  of  whose  fruit  causes  it."  As  for 
'  the  pretences/  which  this  witness  spake  of ;  they  were  none 
of  mine,  as  appears  evidently  by  the  letter  itself. 

An  Appendix  to  these,  was  added  a  letter  of  my  secretary,  270 
Mr.  Dell,  to  Sir  John  Bridgman,  Chief  Justice  of  Chester,  in 
a  cause  of  one  Ed.  Morris.  It  was  (as  I  think  it  appears) 
upon  an  encroachment  made  in  the  Marches  Court  upon  the 
Church :  in  which  case  I  conceive  by  my  place  I  may  write 
to  any  judge  for  information  :  and  there  is  nothing  peremp 
tory  in  the  letter.  The  words  are,  '  if  things  be  rightly  sug 
gested/  But  howsoever,  the  letter  is  Dell's;  and  if  he  have 
done  amiss  in  it,  he  is  here  present  to  answer.  And  it  will 
be  a  hard  business  with  men  of  honour,  if,  when  any  lord 
shall  command  his  secretary  to  write,  and  give  him  directions 
for  the  matter,  he  shall  afterwards  3  be  answerable  for  every 
slip  of  his  secretary's  pen ;  especially  in  so  high  a  way  as  'tis 
charged  on  me.  But  the  best  is,  here's  nothing  amiss,  that 
I  know. 

1  ['  of  proceeding,'  in  margin.    Originally  'of  law/] 

2  ['rooting  out'  originally  written  'taking  away'] 

3  ['  afterwards '  in  marg.] 




THE  first  charge  of  this  day  concerned  the  censure,  depri-        I. 
vation  and  imprisonment   of  Mr.  Huntly.      The   witnesses 
produced  are  four.  1644. 

1.  Mr.  Merifield  comes  on  first.     He  says,  <  that  himself1  D 
was  committed  by  the  Lords  of  the  Council ;  and  that  there 

I  said,  that  he  the  said  Merifield2  deserved  to  be  laid  by  the 
heels,  and  to  be  called  into  the  Star-Chamber/  This  man 
was,  as  I  take  it,  Mr.  Huntly's  attorney ;  and  if  I  did  speak 
those  words  concerning  him,  surely  his  words  and  carriage 
deserved  it :  else  I  am  confident  the  Lords  (1 33)  would  not  have 
committed  him  for  a  naked  and3  an  orderly  following  of  his 
client's  cause ;  especially  in  the  presence  of  two  judges, 
Justice  Jonesa  and  Justice  Crookb;  who  he  says  himself  were 
present.  "And  this  answer  I  gave  Mr.  Brown ;  who  in  the 
sum  of  his  charge  against  me  omitted  not  this  case  of  Mr. 
Merifield,  for  so  was  this  attorney's  name." 

2.  The  next  witness  is  Mr.  Huntly  himself.     He   says, 
'  that  I  said  unto  him,  that  he  being  an  ecclesiastical  person, 
and  in  an  ecclesiastical  cause,  ought  not  to  decline  the  Church- 
censure  :  then  followed  his  imprisonment,  and  his  action  for 
false  imprisonment,  and  the  rest  of  his  proceedings/     In  all 
which  the  High-Commission  proceeded  against  him,  and  he 
proceeded  against  the  High-Commissioners  ;  nothing  done  by 
me,  or  against  me,  in  particular.     So  nothing  of  this  charge 
falls  upon  me,  but  the  words ;  and  for  them,  they  are  very  far 
from  offering  to  exempt c  any  clergyman,  him  or  other,  from 
the  temporal  laws,  in  things  cognizable  by  them.  But  I  humbly 

r'  that  himself  originally  written  '  Mr.  Huntley '] 
'that  he  the  said  Merifield'  originally  written  'Mr.  Huntly  '] 
a  naked  and'  interlined.] 

a  [Sir  William  Jones,  one  of  the  Justices  of  the  King's  Bench,  the 

Justices  of  the  Common  Pleas.  (Wood,  author  of  the  Keports.  (Wood,  Ath. 

Ath.  Ox.  ii.  673.)]  Ox.  iii.  26-29.)] 

b  [Sir   George   Croke,   one   of  the  c  'exclude  from  the  benefit 


Sexto,  conceive,  his  oath  of  canonical  obedience  considered,  that  he 
ought  not  to  decline  the  ecclesiastical  judicature,  in  things 
merely  ecclesiastical.  And  if  in  this  my  judgment  I  do  err,  yet  271 
it  is  error  without  crime :  and  surely,  my  Lords,  no  treason. 

3.  The  third  witness  is  John  Dillingham.     He  says,  'that 
Mr.  Huntly  moved  before  the  Ld.  Chief  Justice  Richardson, 
and  that  the  judge  replied,  By  his  faith  he  durst  not  do  him 
justice/     To  this,  my  Lords,  I  answer  :  Here's  never  a  word, 
that  he  durst  not  do  him  justice  for  fear  of  me;  that's  not 
said  by  the  witness,  and  ought  not  by  conjectures  be  enforced 
against  me.     But  howsoever,  if  he  spake  those  words,  the 
more  shame  for  him.     He  *  is  dead,  and  I  will  not  rake  into 
his 2  grave ;  but  if  he  so  spake,  it  seems  he  was  none  of  those 
judges,  which  Jethro  advised  Moses   to  make  for  the  ease 
of  himself,  and  the  good  of  the  people d.     "Mr.  Brown,  in 
summing  up  of  his  charge,  pressed  this  speech  of  the  judge 
hard  upon  me ;  which  enforces  me  to  add  thus  much  more, 
That  this  witness  lays  it  hard  upon  the  judge,  not  upon  me  : 
for  no  proof  is  offered,  that  I  did  solicit  him  in  that  cause  : 
and  if  he  wanted  courage  to  do  justice,  why  sat  he  there  *?" 

4.  The  fourth  witness  was  Mr.  Pit,   a  sworn  officer ;  he 
says,  '  the  order  concerning  Mr.  Huntly  was  from  the  Council, 
and  that  there  was  then  a  full  Board/     So  this  was  no  single 
act  of  mine.      He  says  further,    '  that  he  was  not   simply 
prohibited,  but  only  till  he  had  acquainted  the  Ld.  Keeper 
with  it  *,  or  those  judges  whose  courts  it  concerned/     And 
this  was  so  ordered,  as  I  conceive,  to  remedy  the  tedious  and 
troublesome  interpositions  of  Mr.  Huntly.     Where  it  is  not 
unfit  for  me  to  inform  your  Lps'.,  that  this  cause  of  Mr. 
Huntly's  was  in  my  predecessor  Archbp.  Abbot  his  time; 
I  had  nothing  to  do  in  it,  but  as  any  other  ordinary  Commis 
sioner  then  present  had. 

And  here,  at  the  entering  upon  my  answers  this  day,  I  did 
in  general  put  the  Lords  in  mind,  that  nothing  of  late  times 
was  done,  either  in  Star-Chamber  or  at  Council-table,  which 
was  not  done  in  King  James'  and  Queen  Elizabeth's  times, 

1  ['  He '  originally  '  But  he ']  2  ['  his '  interlined.] 

3  ['  Mr,  Brown,  .  .  .  there  ]'  on  opp.  page.]  *  ['  it,'  interlined.] 

Exod.  xviii.  21. 


before  I  was  born ;  and  that  many  Parliaments  have  been  Die  Sexto. 
since,  and  no  man  accused  of  misdemeanour  for  things  done 
there,  much  less  of  treason :  nor  is  there  any  one  witness, 
that  hath  charged  me,  that  that  which  I  did,  was  '  to  over 
throw  the  laws,  or  to  introduce  arbitrary  government :'  "  that's 
only  the  construction  made  on't  at  the  bar ;  which,  as  it  is 
without  all  proof  for  any  such  intention,  so  I  am  confident 
they  shall  answer  for  it  at  another  bar,  and  for  something 
else  in  these  proceedings." 

Then  followed  the  charge  about  prohibitions  :    in  which   II. 
are  many  particulars,  which  I  shall  take  in  order,  as  the 
several  witnesses  charge  them  upon  me. 

1.  The  first  is  Mr.  Pry n.  He  says,  '  that  an.  4  Caroli  he 
brought  a  prohibition,  and  that  thereupon  I  should  say, 
Doth  the  King  give  us  power,  and  then  are  we  prohibited  ? 
Let  us  go  and  complain/  First,  if  this  were  an.  4  Caroli,  it 
was  long  before  the  Article ;  so  that  I  could  neither  expect 
the  charge,  nor  provide  the  answer.  Secondly,  I  humbly 
conceive,  there's  no  offence  in  the  words.  For  if  a  prohibition 
be  unjustly  granted  upon  misinformation  or  otherwise,  or  if 
we  do  probably  conceive  it  is  ill  grounded  *,  I  hope  'tis  no  sin 
272  to  complain  of  it  to  the  King,  the  fountain  of  justice  in  both 
courts.  2.  Yea ;  but  he  says  further,  '  that  I  said  I  would  lay 
him  by  the  heels  that  brought  the  next/  And  this  Mr.  Burton 
witnesses  with  him.  First,  if  I  did  say  so,  they  were  but  a 
few  hasty  words  :  for  upon  second  thoughts  it  was  not  done. 
Next,  I  desire  your  Lordships  to  consider  what  manner  of 
witness  Mr.  Burton  is ;  who  confesses  here  before  your  Lord 
ships,  that  he  brought  the  next  with  a  purpose  to  tempt  me : 
you  know  whose  office  that  is  ;  and  so  Mr.  Burton  hath 
abundantly  showed  himself,  and  proclaimed  his  religion. 

(134)  3.  As  for  Mr.  Comes6;  he  says  just  the  same  with 
Mr.  Pryn,  and  I  give  the  same  answer. 

Then  about  taking  down  of  a  pew  in  a  church  in  London, 
(my  notes  are  uncertain  for  the  name,)  which  pew  was  set 
above  the  communion-table ;  that  I  required  to  have  it  pulled 
down  j  that  they  came  to  me  to  have  an  order  for  it ;  and 

1  ['  or  if  .  .  .  grounded,'  in  marg.  ] 

e  f.  Combs. 


Die  Sexto,  that  thereupon  1  should  say,  '  You  desire  an  order  of  court, 
that  you  may  have  it  to  show,  and  get  a  prohibition :  but  I 
will  break  the  back  of  prohibitions,  or  they  shall  break  mine/ 
And  this  is  jointly  witnessed  by,  4.  Mr.  Pocock,  and  5.  Mr. 
Langham :  and  this  they  say  was  thirteen  or  fourteen  years  ago. 
Excellent  memories,  that  can  punctually  swear  words  so  long 
after !  But,  my  Lords,  I  confess  to  your  Lps.,  I  could  never 
like,  that  seats  should  be  set  above  the  communion-table  :  if 
that  be  any  error  in  me,  be  it  so.  For  the  words,  I  did  not 
speak  them  of  prohibitions  in  general,  but  of  such  as  I  did 
conceive  very  illegal;  as,  for  aught  I  yet  know,  this  must 
have  been.  "  And  this  was  the  answer  which  I  gave  Mr. 
Brown,  when  in  summing  up  the  charge  he  instanced  in 
this  against  me."  6.  To  these  Rouland  Tomson  adds  new 
words;  "That  I  wondered  who  durst  grant  a  prohibition, 
the  High-Commission  Court  being  above  all/  But  he  con 
fesses,  he  knows  not  the  time  when  this  was  spoken.  Let 
him  look  to  his  oath,  for  I  am  as  confident,  he  knows  not  the 
thing.  And  I  further  believe,  that  neither  he  nor  any  the 
rest  of  my  accusers  think  me  so  ignorant  as  to  say,  the 
'  High-Commission  Court  was  above  all/ 

7.  Francis  Nicolas  says,  that  '  about  four  years  since  he 
delivered  a  prohibition,  and  was  committed  for  it/  8.  To  this, 
Quaterman  comes  in,  and  says  more  than  Nicolas  himself: 
for  he  says,  'he  delivered  it  in  upon  a  stick,  and  was  com 
mitted  for  it/  First,  if  he  were  committed,  it  was  not  for 
bringing  the  prohibition,  but  for  his  unmannerly  delivery  of 
it ;  and  to  reach  it  into  the  court  upon  a  stick  to  call  the 
people  to  see  it,  was  no  handsome  way  of  delivery.  And  one 
that  brought  a  prohibition  (whether  this  man  or  no,  I  cannot 
certainly  say)  threw  it  with  that  violent  scorn  into  the  court, 
that  it  bounded  on  the  table,  and  hit  me  on  the  breast,  as  I 
sat  in  court.  Howsoever,  his  commitment  was  the  act  of  the 
court,  not  mine :  and  for  Quaterman,  he  is  an  exasperated 
man  against  me  and  that  court;  as  hath  appeared  to  the 
world  many  ways. 

9.  Mr.  Edwards  was  called  up  next ;  and  he  says,  '  it  was 
a  common  thing  to  lay  them  by  the  heels  which  brought 
prohibitions/  And  they  were  commonly  brought  by  bold 
impudent  men,  picked  out  of  purpose  to  affront  the  court . 


273  And  then  if  the  court  made  their  imprisonment  as  common  Die  Sexto, 
as  they  their  rudeness,  where' s  the  fault?    And  I  pray  mark, 
this  is  still  the  act  of  the  court,  not  mine. 

10.  Mr.  Welden  says,  that1  { there  was  a  command  given 
to  lay  hold  of  a  man  which  brought  a  prohibition  :'  but  more 
he  says  not.     Nor  did  he  offer  to  make  himself  judge  of  the 
justice  of  the  court  in  that  behalf.     And  considering  what 
affronts  have  been  put  upon  the  Court  of  High-Commission 
by   the   bringers   of   prohibitions,    I   hope   it   shall  not    be 
accounted  a  crime  to  stay  him  that  brings  it,  till  the  prohi 
bition  be  seen,  and  considered. 

11.  The  next  witness  is  Mr.  Ward  :  "  and  he  is  an  angry 
witness,    for   his   cause   before-mentioned    about    simony {." 
That  which  he  says  is,  '  that  an.  1638,  he  that  brought  a 
prohibition  in  a  cause  of  Mr.  Foetrought's 2  was  laid  by  the 
heels  :'    but  he  himself  confesses,  the  court  then  declared, 
that  they  were  affronted  by  him  :  and  then  he  was  punished 
for  that  misdemeanour  in  his  carriage,  not  for  bringing  the 
prohibition.      He   says  further,  { that  I  directed  some  com 
missioners  to  attend  the  judges  about  it,  and  that  the  party 
had  no  benefit  by  his  prohibition/  For  my  directing3  attend 
ance  upon  the  judges,  I  think  I  did  what  well  became  me  : 
for  there  came  a  rule  before  the  prohibition,  which  required 
the  court  so4  to  do;  "and  Mr.  Pry n  objected,  because  this 
was  not  done ;  and  now  I  am  accused,  because 5  I  gave  direc 
tion  to  do  it."     And  if  the  party  had  no  benefit  by  his  pro 
hibition,  it  must  needs  follow,  that  either  the  judges  were 
satisfied  by  our  information  of  the  cause ;  or,  if  not,  that  they 
did  Mr.  Foetrought  the  wrong,  and  not  we. 

12.  The  last  witness  about  prohibitions  was  Mr.  Wheeler. 
He  says,  that  in  a  sermon  of  mine  long  since,  I  used  these 
words :  '  They  which  grant  prohibitions  to  the  disturbance  of 
the  Church's  right,  God  will  prohibit  their  entrance  into  the 
kingdom  of  heaven :'  and  he  says,  (135)   '  he  writ  down  the 

Originally  written,  '  that  a  man  which  brought  a  prohibition  was '] 

'  in  a  cause  of  Mr.  Foetroughts/  in  marg.] 

''  directing '  originally  written  '  sending '] 

''  the  court  so '  originally  written  '  me  so '] 

The  words  'I  am  accused'  here  inaccurately  repeated.] 

[See  above,  p.  128.  ] 


Die  Sexto,  words,  that  he  might  remember  them.'  If  this  gentleman 
will  tell  me  what  text  I  then  preached  on,  I  will  look  upon 
my  sermon  (if  that  with  my  other  papers  be  not  taken  from 
me)  and  show  the  place.  In  the  meantime,  with  that  limita 
tion  with  which  he  confesses  I  spake  them,  I  conceive  there 
is  no  fault  at  all  in  the  words.  For  it  will  be  found  no  small 
fault  in  judges  to  grant  prohibitions  to  the  disturbance  of  the 
rights  of  the  Church,  which  no  law  of  God  or  man  warrants 
them  to  do.  So  the  words  I  spake  must  needs  be  understood 
of  illegal  prohibitions.  For  they  which  are  legal,  do  only 
stop  the  Church  from  doing  wrong,  but  do  no  wrong  to  the 
Church  by  disturbing  her  rights.  "  Mr.  Browne  charged 
this  sermon  note  upon  me  also,  and  I  gave  him  this  answer. 
Nevertheless,  I  cannot  but  be  sorry  to  hear  it  from  Mr. 
Wheeler's  own  mouth ',  that  he  was  so  careful  to  write  this 
passage,  and  so  ready  to  come  to  witness  it  against  me ;  con 
sidering  how  many  years  I  have  known  him,  and  how  freely 
he  hath  often  come  to  my  table,  and  been  welcome  to  me ; 
yet  never  told  me  this  passage  in  my  sermon  troubled  him. 
It  seems  some  malignity  or  other  laid  it  up  against  this 
wet  day." 

Here,  having  thus  answered  all  particulars,  I  humbly 
craved  leave  of  their  Lordships,  to  inform  them  some  few 
things  concerning  prohibitions.  1.  As  first,  that  there  was  a 
great  contestation  about  them,  between  my  predecessor,  274 
Archbp.  Bancroft,  and  the  then  judges,  and  this  before  King 
James  and  the  Lords  of  the  Council;  and  Mr.  Attorney 
Hobarts  pleaded  for  the  Church  against  them.  Sir  Henry 
Martin  gave  me  copies  of  all  those  papers  on  both  sides.  No 
final  end  made,  that  I  could  ever  hear  of.  This  calling  them 
all  in  question  was  far  more  than  ever  was  done  by  me,  or  in 
my  time ;  and  yet  no  accusation  at  all,  much  less  any  of 
treason 2,  put  up  against  Archbishop  Bancroft  for  this. 
2.  Secondly,  I  have  here  papers  attested  of  all  the  prohibi 
tions  which  have  been  admitted  in  my  Courts  of  Arches  and 

1  ['So  the  words  .  .  .  mouth,'  on  opposite  page.     The  passage  originally 
stood,  '  to  do.     But  I  am  sorry  to  hear  from  his  own  mouth,  that'  &c.] 
['  much  less  any  of  treason/  in  margin.] 

«  [Sir    Henry  Hobart,   afterwards     Pleas;    the  ancestor  of  the  Earls  of 
Lord  Chief  Justice  of  the  Common      Buckinghamshire.] 


Audience:  and  I  find  there  are  as  many  (if  not1  more)  Die  Sexto, 
admitted  in  my  seven  years'  time,  as  in  any  seven  years  of 
my  predecessor,  Archbishop  Abbot.  And  these  papers  I 
delivered  into  the  court11.  As  for  the  High-Commission,  the 
records  are  all  taken  from  us ;  else  I  make  no  doubt,  but  it 
would  soon  appear  by  them,  that  as  many  have  been  admitted 
there  also2.  3.  Thirdly,  there  is  a  great  difference  touching 
prohibitions,  and  the  sending  of  them,  since  the  times  of 
Reformation,  and  before.  For  before,  the  Bishops'  Courts 
were  kept  under  a  foreign  power,  and  there  were  then  weighty 
reasons  for  prohibitions,  both  in  regard  of  the  King's  power, 
and  the  subjects'  indemnity.  But  since  the  Reformation,  all 
power  exercised  in  the  spiritual  courts  is  from  the  King,  as 
well  as  the  temporal ;  so  that  now  there  neither  is,  nor  can 
be,  so  much  cause  as  formerly  was.  And  yet,  all  that  I  did 
humbly  and  earnestly  desire  was,  that  some  known  bounds 
might  be  set  to  each  court,  that  the  subject  might  not,  to  his 
great  trouble  and  expense,  be  hurried,  as  now  he  was,  from 
one  court  to  another.  And  here  I  desired  a  salvo,  till  I  might 
bring  Archbishop  Parker's  book1,  to  show  his  judgment  in 
this  point,  in  the  beginning  of  the  Reformation,  if  it  shall  be 
thought  needful :  "  according  to  whose  judgment  (and  he 
proves  it  at  large)  there  is  open  wrong  done  to  the  ecclesias 
tical  jurisdiction  by  prohibitions3." 

The  next  charge  is  about  my  undue  taking  of  gifts  :  a  charge  III. 
which,  I  confess,  I  did  not  think  to  meet  here.  And  I  must 
and  do  humbly  desire  your  Lps.  to  remember,  that  till  this 
day  I  have  not  been  accused,  in  the  least  for  doing  anything 
corruptly :  and  if  I  would  have  had  anything  to  do  in  the 
base  dirty  business  of  bribery,  I  needed  not  have  been  in 
such  want  as  now  I  am.  But  my  innocency  is  far  more  to 
my  comfort,  than  any  wealth  so  gotten  could  have  been.  For 
I  cannot  forget  that  of  Job,  that  'fire  shall  consume  the 

[•'  if  not '  interlined;  originally  '  or'] 

2  ['  As  for  ...  also.'  on  opposite  page.] 

3  ['in  the  beginning  .  .  .  prohibitions  '  inserted  afterwards  ;  from  the  word 
'  Information '  on  opposite  page ;  the  words,  '  if  it  shall  be  thought  needful 
were  originally  written  after  the  word  '  point,'  and  then  erased.] 

h  Sir  Timothy  Baldwin  hath  these      vita  Joh.  Stafford,  pp.  326,  327,  [p. 
papers.— W.  S.  A.  C.  431.  Lond.  1729.] 

Ma.  Parkeri  Antiqu.   Britan.   in 


Die  Sexto,  tabernacles  of  bribery  V  "And  in  the  Roman  story,  when 
P.  Rutilius,  a  man  summa  innocentia,  of  greatest  integrity, 
was  accused,  condemned,  and  banished ;  'tis  observed  by  the 
story,  that  he  suffered  all  this,  not  for  bribery,  of  which  he 
was  not  guilty,  but  ob  invidiam,,  for  envy1;  against  which, 
when  it  rages,  no  innocency,  no  worth  of  any  man  is  able  to 

1.  But  to  come  to  the  particulars ;  the  first  is  the  case  of 
Sir  Edward  Gresham's  son,  unhappily  married  against  his 
father's  will ;  a  suit  in  the  High- Commission  about  it ;  and 
that  ( there  he  had1  but  fifty  pounds  damages  given  him.' 
That  was  no  fault  of  mine ;  my  vote  gave  him  more,  but  it 
was  carried  against  me.  The  bond  of  two  hundred  pounds, 
which  was  taken  according  to  course  in  the  court111,  was  275 
demanded  of  me  by  Sir  Edward,  to  help  himself  that  way ; 
and  'tis  confessed  I  granted  it :  but2  then  'tis  charged,  ' that 
in  my  reference  to  Sir  John  Lambe,  to  deliver  him  the  bond, 
I  required  him  to  demand  one-half  of  the  forfeiture  of  the3 
bond,  toward  the  repair  of  St.  Paul's.  'Tis  true,  I  did  so. 
But  first,  I  desire  it  may  be  considered,  that  it  was  wholly  in 
my  power,  whether  I  would  have  delivered  him  the  bond  or 
not.  Secondly,  that  upon  this  gross  abuse,  I  might  have 
sued  the  bond  in  my  own  name,  and  bestowed  the  money 
upon  what  charitable  uses  I  had  thought  fit.  Thirdly,  that 
I  did  nothing  herein,  but  what  the  letters  patent  for  repair 
of  S.  Paul's  give  me  power  (136)  to  do.  Fourthly,  that  this 
is  the  third  time  S.  Paul's  is  urged  against  me  :  which  I  am 
not  sorry  for,  because  I  desire,  since  'tis  once  moved,  it  may 
be  sifted  to  the  uttermost.  And  whereas,  to  make  all  ecclesi 
astical  proceedings  the  more  odious,  it  was  urged,  '  that  the 
rubric  in  the  Common-Prayer  Book  mentions  no  licence,  but 
asking  of  banns ;'  that  rubric  is  to  be  understood,  where  no 
licence  is  granted11 :  for  else  no  licence  at  all  for  marriage 
without  banns-asking  can  be  good ;  which  is  against  the 
common  botn  law  and  practice  of  the  kingdom. 

1  ['  had '  interlined.]          2  ['  but '  originally  written  '  but  that'] 
3  ['forfeiture  of  the' in  margin.] 

k  Job  xv.  34.  do  not  occur.] 

Calvis.  Chro.  p.  251.  [Prancof.  ad          m  Can.  Ecc.  Ang.  101. 
Oder.  1620.  The  words, '  ob  invidiam,'          "  Can.  62.  Ecc.  Ang. 


2.  The  second  particular  was  charged  by  one  Mr.  Stone,  Die  Sexto, 
of  London0,  who  said,  '  he  sent  into  Lambeth  two  butts1  of 
sack,  in  a  cause  of  some  Chester-men,  whom  it  was  then  in 
my  power  to  relieve,  and  mitigate  their  fine  set  upon  them  in 
the  High-Commission  at  York2,  about  Mr.  Pryn's  entertain 
ment,  as  he  passed  that  way ;  and  that  this  sack  was  sent  in 
before  my  composition  with  him,  what  should  be  mitigated, 
and  so  before  my  return  of  the  fine  mitigated  into  the  ex 
chequer/  The  business,  my  Lords,  was  thus.  His  Majesty 
having  taken3  the  repair  of  the  west  end  of  S.  Paul's  to 
himself,  granted  me  to  that  end  all  the  fines  in  the  High- 
Commission  Court,  both  here  and  at  York,  and  left  the  power 
of  mitigation  in  me,  The  Chester-men  which  this  witness 
speaks  of,  were  deeply  sentenced  at  York,  for  some  misde 
meanours  about  Mr.  Pryn,  then  lately  sentenced  in  the  Star- 
Chamber.  One  or  more  of  them  were  debtors4  to  this  Mr. 
Stone,  to  the  value  of  near  three  thousand  pounds,  as  he  said. 
These  men,  for  fear  of  the  sentence,  kept  themselves  close, 
and  gave  Mr.  Stone  to  know,  how  it  was  with  them  ;  and  that 
if  he  could  not  get  me  to  moderate  the  fine5,  they  would 
away,  and  save  themselves :  for  they  had  now  heard  the 
power  was  in  me.  Upon  this,  Mr.  Stone,  to  save  his  own 
debt  of  three  thousand  pounds,  sends  his  son-in-law,  Mr. 
Wheat,  and  Dr.  Baillie,  men  that  were  bred  in  the  College  of 
S.  John,  under  me,  and  had  ever  since  good  interest  in  me, 
to  desire  my  favour6.  I  at  first  thought  this  a  pretence,  and 
was  willing  to  preserve  to  S.  Paul's  as  much  as  fairly  I  might : 
but  at  last,  upon  their  earnest  pleading,  that  the  men  were 
not  rich,  and  that  Mr.  Stone  was  like,  without  any  fault  of 
his,  to 7  be  so  much  damnified ;  I  mitigated  their  fines,  which 
were  in  all  above  a  thousand  pounds,  to  two  hundred.  I 
had  great  thanks  of  all  hands ;  and  was  told  from  the  Chester- 
men,  that  they  heartily  wished  I  had  had  the  hearing  of  their 

1  ['  butts '  originally  written  '  pipes ']          2  ['  in  the  .  .  .  York,'  in  marg.] 

3  ['  taken '  originally  written  '  undertaken '] 

4  ['  debtors '  originally  written  '  creditors ']  5  ['  fine  '  interlined.] 

6  ['to  desire  my  favour.'  in  margin.] 

7  ['  to  '  originally  written  'was  like  to  '] 

0  [This  story  of  Mr.  Stone  has  been      404;  the  notes  on  which  passage  may 
related  before.    See  vol.  iii.  pp.  402 —     be  consulted.] 


Die  Sexto,  cause  from  the  beginning.  While  Mr.  Wheat  and  his  brother 
Dr.  Baillie,  were  soliciting  me  for  favour  to  Mr.  Stone,  he 
thinks  upon  sending  sack  into  my  house,  and  comes  to  my 
steward  about  it.  My  steward  acquaints  me  with.  it.  I  gave  276 
him  absolute  command  not  to  receive  it,  nor  anything  from 
any  mail  that  had  business  before  me  :  so  he  refuses  to  admit 
of  any.  Mr.  Stone  presses  him  again,  and  tells  him  he  had1 
no  relation  to  the  Chester-men's  cause;  but  would  give  it  for 
the  great  favour  I  had  always  showed  to  his  son-in-law :  but 
still  I  commanded  my  steward  to  receive  none.  When  Mr. 
Stone  saw  he  could  not  fasten  it,  he  watches  a  time  when 
my  steward  was  out  of  town,  and  myself  at  Court,  and  brings 
in  his  sack,  and  tells  the  yeoman  of  my  wine-cellar  he  had 
leave  to  lay  it  in.  My  steward  comes  home ;  finds  the  sack 
in  the  cellar ;  tells  me  of  it :  I  commanded  it  should  be  taken 
out,  and  carried  back.  Then  Mr.  Stone  comes2 ;  entreats  he 
may  not  be  so  disgraced ;  protests  as  before,  that  he  did  it 3 
merely  for  my  great  favour  to  his  son-in-law ;  and  that  he 
had  no  relation  to  the  Chester-men's  business  :  and  so  after 
he  protested  to  myself,  meeting  me  in  a  morning,  as  I  was 
going  over  to  the  Star-Chamber.  Yet  afterwards  this  reli 
gious  professor  (for  so  he  carries  himself)  goes  home,  and 
puts  the  price  of  the  sack  upon  the  Chester-men's  account. 
Hereupon  they  complain  to  the  House  of  Commons,  and 
Stone  is  their  witness. 

This  is  the  truth  of  this  business,  as  I  shall  answer  it  to 
God.  "  And  whether  this  do  not  look  like  a  thing  plotted 
by  the  faction  so  much  embittered  against  me,  let  under 
standing  men  judge."  Mr.  Wheat,  his  son-in-law,  was 
present  in  court,  and  there  avowed  that  he  transacted4  the 
business  with  me,  and  that  he  went  not  out  of  town,  till  I  had 
agreed  to  the  mitigation ;  that  in  all  that  time  there  was  no 
tender  of  sack  or  anything  else  unto  me ;  and  he,  and  Dr. 
Baillie',  (137)  the  only  men  with  whom  I  transacted  the  whole 
business.  "  And  so  much  could  Dr.  Baillie  also  witness,  but 
that,  as  the  times  are,  I  could  not  bring  him  from  Oxford." 

1  ['  he  had '  originally  written  '  it  had  '] 

2  ['comes;'  originally  ' comes  to  me ;'] 

3  that  he  did  it' in  margin.] 

«  ['transacted'  originally  written  'performed'] 

s  ['  and  Dr.  Bailie,'  on  opp.  page.     Originally  written, '  he  was  the '] 


With  Mr.  Stone  himself  I  never  treated.  For  my  steward.  Die  Sexto, 
he  is  dead  three  years  since,  who  could  have  been  my  witness 
clean  thorough  the  business.  And  when  I  pressed  Mr.  Stone 
at  the  bar  with  the  protestation  which  he  made  to  me,  that 
he  had  no  relation  herein  to  the  Chester-men,  he,  that  remem 
bered  every  circumstance  else,  said  he  remembered  not  that. 
Then  I  offered  to  take  my  voluntary  oath  of  the  truth  of  it ; 
but  that  was  not  admitted.  Then  it  was  pressed,  '  that  this 
bribe  must  needs  be  before  the  agreement,  for  he  says,  the 

sack  was  sent  in  to  my  house  *, and  the  mitigation 

of  the  fine  into  the  exchequer  not  till '  But  that  is 

nothing :  for  my  agreement  was  passed,  and  I  meddled  no 
more  with  it.  Yea,  but  he  says,  '  that  Mr.  Holford,  my 
servant  P,  had  forty  pound  more  than  I  agreed  upon,  before 
he  would  finish  their  business/  Mr.  Holford  was  the  King's 
officer  for  those  returns  into  the  exchequer :  and  if,  after  my 
agreement  made,  he  either  unduly  delayed  their  business,  or 
corruptly  took  any  money  from  them,  he  is  living,  and  must 
answer  for  his  own  fault :  me  it  cannot  concern,  who  did  not 
so  much  as  know  of  it. 

"Mr.  Wheat  having  thus  testified  in  open  Parliament, 
before  the  Lords,  was  within  a  day  or  two  called  before  the 
Committee ;  there  reexamined  in  private,  and  very  strictly, 
277  touching  the  time  of  my  agreement  made  ;  then  (not  without 
some  harshness)  commanded  not  to  depart  the  town,  till  he 
heard  further  from  them.  This  himself  afterwards  told  me. 
Hereupon  I  resolved  to  call  him  again  for  further  evidence, 
and  if  I  saw  cause,  to  acquaint  the  Lords  with  this  usage. 
And  I  did  call  upon  it  divers  times  after ;  but  one  delay  or 
other  was  found,  and  I  could  never  obtain  it.  And  such  a 
kind  of  calling  my  witnesses  to  a  private  after-reckoning  2  is 
that  which  was  never  offered  any  man  in  Parliament.  And 
here  Mr.  Brown,  in  summing  up  my  charge,  did  me  a  great 
deal  of  right :  for  neither  to  the  Lords,  nor  in  the  House  of 
Commons,  did  he  vouchsafe  so  much  as  to  name  this  false, 
base,  and  unworthy  charge,  of  which  my  greatest  enemies  are 
ready  to  acquit  me  V; 

1  [*  to  my  house,'  in  margin.] 

2  ['  a  private  after-reckoning'  in  margin.     Originally 'account'] 

3  ['And  here  .  .  .  acquit  me.' added  afterwards.] 

P  [Benjamin  Holford  was  bequeathed  20/.  in  the  Archbishop's  will.] 
LAUD. — VOL.  iv.  L 


Die  Sexto.  3.  The  third  particular  was  charged  by  one  Mr.  Delbridge ; 
who  says,  '  he  was  oppressed  at  the  Council-table  by  the  Ld. 
Keeper  Finch  :  that  he  was  advised  by  Mr.  Watkins,  to  give 
my  secretary  Mr.  Dell  money,  to  get  my  hand  to  a  petition 
to  the  Ld.  Keeper,  who,  he  said,  would  not  oppose  me :  that 
Dell  took  of  him  one  hundred  and  fifty  pounds,  and  procured 
my  hand  to  his  petition/  I  remember  nothing  of  this  busi 
ness,  and  it  lies  wholly  upon  my  secretary;  who  being  my 
solicitor,  is  here  present  in  court,  and  desires  he  may  answer 
the  scandal.  There's  no  touch  at  all  upon  me,  but  that  (he 
says)  my  secretary  got  my  hand  to  his  petition  to  the  Lord 
Keeper.  This  petition  of  his  was  either  just,  or  unjust.  If 
just,  I  committed  no  fault  in  setting  my  hand  to  it :  if  unjust, 
he  must  confess  himself  a  dishonest  man,  to  offer  to  get  my 
hand,  to  help  to  bolster  out  his  injustice:  and  yet  if  the 
injustice  of  it  were  varnished  over  with  fair  pretences,  and  so 
kept  from  my  knowledge ;  the  crime  is  still  his  own,  and 
nothing  mine,  but  an  error  at  most.  As  for  Mr.  Watkins, 
he  did  me  much  wrong,  if  he  sent  any  man  to  my  house  on 
such  an  errand. 

"  Here  my  Secretary  had  leave  to  speak ;  denied  the  whole 
business ;  and  produced  Mr.  Hollys,  with  whom  it  was  said 
the  hundred  and  fifty  pounds  before  named  should  be  depo 
sited  ;  who  (to  my  remembrance)  said,  he  knew  of  no  such 

4.  The  fourth  instance  was,  '  a  bond  for  the  payment  of 
money  as  a  fine  :  the  bond  found  in  Sir  Jo.  Lamb's  chamber, 
with  a  note  upon  the  back  of  it,  for  one  hundred  pound 
received,  and  Sir  John  by  my  direction  was  to  call  for  the 
rest.'  And  here  it  was  said,  that  I  used  the  name  of  St.  Paul's 
in  an  illegal  way  to  get  money ;  which  might  well  have  been 
spared.  For  (as  is  aforesaid)  I  had  a  Broad  Seal,  which  gave 
me  all  fines  in  the  High-Commission  Court,  to  the  repairing 
of  the 1  west  end  of  St.  Paul's,  and  with  power  to  mitigate. 
And  the  fines  are  the  King's,  and  he  may  give  them  by  law. 
The  Broad  Seal  (138)  is  in  the  hands  of  Mr.  Holford,  who  is 
thereby  appointed  receiver  of  all  such  fines  :  but  is  upon 
record  to  be  seen ;  and  if  it  be  doubted,  I  humbly  desire  a 
salvo  till  the  record  can  be  taken  out,  and  showed.  But  I 

1  ['repairing  of  the'  in  margin.] 


presume  these  gentlemen  have  seen  it :  and  commutations  for  Die  Sexto. 
such  crimes  as  Sir  James  Price's  was,  are  according  to  law, 
and  the  ancient  custom  and  practice  in  this  kingdom ;  espe- 
278  cially,  where  men  of  quality  are  the  offenders.  And  the 
power  of  commuting  is  as  legal  in  that  court  as  any  other : 
and  if  that  be  doubted,  I  humbly  desire  my  counsel  may 
argue  it. 

5.  The  fifth  instance  was  a  charge  concerning  a  lease  in 
Lancashire  held  in  three  lives  by  Sir  Ralph  Aston  1.  "Tis 
said  by  his  son  Mr.  Aston  (the  only  witness  in  the  cause), 
that  {  I,  by  power  at  Chester  and  York,  and  the  High-Com 
mission  here1,  being  landlord  in  right  of  my  archbishopric, 
did  violently  wrest  this  lease  of  the  rectory  of  Whally,  in 
Lancashire1,  out  of  his  hands  against  law,  and  made  him 
take 2  a  lease  for  years,  and  pay  a  great  fine  besides,  and  other 
fines  besides  toward  the  repair  of  St.  Paul's,  and  raised  the 
rent  sixty  pound3/  Truly,  my  Lords,  I  am  not  any  whit 
solicitous  to  answer  this  charge.  I  challenged  this  lease  as 
void,  and  had  great  reason  so  to  do,  both  for  the  invalidity  of 
the  lease  itself,  and  the  unworthiness  of  the  tenant,  both  to 
me  and  my  See.  If  in  the  preparations  for  trial  at  law,  the 
judge  at  Chester  (altogether  unknown  to  me,  and  unlaboured 
by  me)  did  say  (as  Mr.  Aston  says  he  did),  that  '  for  higher 
powers  above  he  durst  not/  he  was  the  more  unworthy. 
And  for  York,  I  needed  no  power  there;  for  I  resolved  to 
have  him  called  into  the  High-Commission  here ;  which  was 
after  done. 

This  gentleman  his  son  came  to  me  about  the  lease  :  I  told 
him  plainly,  it  was  void  in  law,  and  that  I  meant  to  over 
throw  it ;  that  if  his  father  would  surrender,  I  would  renew 
it  for  years  at  a  reasonable  rate ;  but  if  he  put  me  to  expense 
in  law,  I  would  secure  myself,  as  well  as  legally  I  might. 

1  ['and  the  High- Commission  here,'  in  margin.] 

2  ['  him  take  '  originally  '  him  pay '] 

3  ['and  raised  .  .  .  pound.'  in  margin.]; 

i  [The  name  is  written  'Aston'  in  burn,  and  Eochdale,  formerly  belong- 

the  MS.  ;  but  the  person  referred  to  ing  to  the  monastery  of  Whalley,  came 

is  Sir  Ralph  Assheton,  of  Lever,  created  into  the  possession  of  the  See  of  Canter- 

a  Baronet  June  28,  1620.]  bury,  Aug.  31,  1547.  See  Strype's 

r  [The  rectories  of  Whalley,  Black-  Cranmer,  pp.  403,  910.] 



Die  Sexto.  He  replied,  that  '  Mr.  Solicitor  Littleton s'  (for  so  then  he 
was)  '  said,  he  durst  not  be  against  me.'  And  there  was  good 
reason  for  it ;  he  was  my  counsel,  and  feed  in  that  particular. 
And  what  a  poor  evasion  was  this  !  Were  there  no  other 
lawyers  for  him,  because  Mr.  Solicitor  was  for  me?  The 
truth  is,  all  that  ever  I  did  in  this  business,  was  not  only  with 
the  knowledge,  but  by  the  advice  of  my  counsel,  which  were 
Mr.  Solicitor  Littleton  and  Mr.  Herbert  *. 

At  last  this  gentleman  submitted  himself  and  the  cause ; 
and  if,  as  he  says,  l  Dr.  Eden"  persuaded  him  to  it/  that's 
nothing  to  me.  As  for  the  fine,  I  referred  the  moderation 
of  it  wholly  to  my  counsel.  They  pitched  upon  sixteen  hun 
dred  pounds,  and  gave  such  days  of  payment,  as  that  a  good 
part  is  yet  unpaid :  and  this  sum  was  little  above  one  year's 
rent :  for  the  parsonage  is  known  to  be  well  worth  thirteen 
hundred  pound  a  year,  if  not  more.  And  after  the  business 
was  settled,  my  Lord  Wimbleton v  came  to  me,  and  gave  me 
great  thanks  for  preserving  this  gentleman,  being,  as  he  said, 
his  kinsman,  whom  he  confessed  it  was  in  my  power  to  ruin. 
For  '  the  raising  of  the  rent  sixty  pounds  ;'  it  was  to 
add  means  to  the  several  curates  to  the  chapels  of  ease  : 
and  I  had  no  reason  to  suffer  Sir  Ralph  Aston  to  go  away 
with  so  much  profit,  and  leave  the  curates  both  upon  my 
conscience  and  my  purse.  And  for  his  fine  to  St.  Paul's, 
I  gave  him  all  the  ease  I  could.  But  since  his  son  will  force 
it  from  me ;  he  was  accused  of  adultery  with  divers  wromen, 
and  confessed  all  :  and  whither  that  fine  went,  and  by  what 
authority,  I  have  already  showed.  And  thus  much  more, 
my  Lords,  at  Mr.  Bridgman's  vv  entreaty,  I  turned  this  lease 
into  lives  again  without  fine  *  :  but  since  I  have  this  reward  279 

1  [*  without  fine  :'  in  margin.] 

8  [Afterwards  Lord  Littleton,  and  the  Netherlands.] 

Keeper  of  the  Great  Seal,  in  the  room  'v  [Orlando  Bridgman,  son  of  Dr. 

of  Lord  Finch.]  John  Bridgman,  Bishop  of  Chester. 

1  [Afterwards  Sir  Edward  Herbert,  He  appears  to  have  been  the  Arch- 
Solicitor  and  Attorney  General,  and  bishop's  legal  adviser,  and  to  have 
Lord  Keeper.]  held  his  courts.  (See  Archbishop 

u  [Dr.  Thomas  Eden,  Master  of  Tri-  Laud's    Berkshire    Benefactions,   pp. 

nity  Hall,  Cambridge,  Chancellor  of  28,  49.)     At  the  Restoration  he  was 

Ely,  Professor  of   Law   in    Gresham  made    Sergeant-at-Law ;      afterwards 

College.]  successively  Lord  Chief  Baron  of  the 

T  [Edward  Cecil,  created  Viscount  Exchequer,  Lord  Chief  Justice  of  the 

Wimbledon  July  25,  1626.     He  had  Common  Pleas  ;  and  Lord  Keeper  on 

distinguished  himself  in  the  war  in  the  removal  of  Lord  Clarendon.] 


for  it,  I  wish  with  all  my  heart  I  had  not  done  it.     For  I  am  Die  Sexto. 
confident,  in  such  a  case  of  right,  your  Lordships  would  have 
left  me  to  the  law,  and  more  I  would  not  have  asked.     And 
I  think  this  (though  entreated  into  it)  was  my  greatest  error 
in  the  business. 

(139)  6.  The  last  instance  was  about  the  conversion  of  some 
money  to  St.  Paul's,  out  of  administrations  x  :  '  by  name, 
two  thousand  poimds  taken  out  of  Wimark'a  estate,  and  five 
hundred  out  of  Mr.  Greye's/  First,  whatsoever  was  done  in 
this  kind,  I  have  the  Broad- Seal  to  warrant  it.  And  for 
Mr.  Wimark's  estate,  all  was  done  according  to  law,  and  all 
care  taken  for  his  kindred.  And  if  I  had  not  stirred  in  the 
business,  four  men,  all  strangers  to  his  kindred,  would  have 
made  themselves  by  a  broken  will  executors,  and  swept  all 
away  from  the  kindred.  Secondly,  for  Mr.  Gray's  estate, 
after  as  odious  an  expression  of  it  as  could  be  made,  and  as 
void  of  truth  as  need  to  be,  the  proceedings  were  confessed 
to  be  orderly  and  legal,  and  the  charge  deserted. 

Then  there  was  a  fling  at  Sir  Charles  Caesar's  getting  of 
'  the  Mastership  of  the  Rolls  y  for  money,  and  that  I  was  his 
means  for  it  •'  and  so  it  was  thence  *  inferred,  that  I  sold 
places  of  judicature,  or  helped  to  sell  them.  For  this  they 
produced  a  paper  under  my  hand.  But  when  they  had 
thrown  all  the  dirt  they  could  upon  me,  they  say  they  did 
only  show  what  probabilities  they  had  for  it,  and  what  reason 
they  had  to  lay  it  in  the  end  of  the  fourth  original  Article ; 
and  so  deserted  it.  And  well  they  might :  for  I  never  had 
more  hand  in  this  business,  than  that  when  he  came  to  me 
about  it  2,  I  told  him  plainly,  as  things  then  stood,  that 3 
place  was  not  like  to  go  without  more  money  than  I  thought 
any  wise  man  would  give  for  it :  nor  doth  the  paper  mentioned 
say  any  more,  but  that  I  informed  the  Lord  Treasurer  what 
had  passed  between  us. 

1  ['  it  was  thence  '  in  margin.]  2  ['it,'  originally  'the  business,'] 

3  ['that'  originally  'I  told  him  that'] 

z  [In  the  Commission  for  the  repair  iii.  175.] 

of    S.  Paul's,   power    was    given    to  r  [Sir  Charles  Caesar  was  appointed 

apply  the  goods  of  intestate  persons  to  Master  of  the  Rolls,  March  30,  1639. 

this  purpose.   See  Rymer,  Feed.  VIII.  (Rymer,  Feed.  IX.  ii.  248.)] 


CAP.  XXVIII.  280 

Die  THIS  day  ended,  I  was  ordered  to  appear  again,  April  4, 

Septimo.     1544      ^nd   received   a   note   from  the  Gommittee,  under 

April  l,      Sergeant  Wild's  hand,  dated  April  1,  that  they  meant  to 

proceed  next  upon  the  fifth  and  sixth  original  Articles,  and 

upon  the  ninth  additional  j  which  follow  in  hcec  verba. 

The  fifth  original : — He  hath  traitorously  caused  a  Book  of 
Canons  to  be  composed  and  published,  and  those  Canons 
to  be  put  in  execution,  without  any  lawful  warrant  and 
authority  in  that  behalf;  in  which  pretended  Canons 
many  matters  are  contained  contrary  to  the  King's  pre 
rogative,  to  the  fundamental  laws  and  statutes  of  this  * 
realm,  to  the  right  of  Parliament,  to  the  propriety  and 
liberty  of  the  subjects,  and  matters  tending  to  sedition, 
and  of  dangerous  consequence,  and  to  the  establishment 
of  a  vast,  unlawful,  and  presumptuous  power,  in  himself 
and  his  successors :  many  of  the  which  Canons,  by  the 
practice  of  the  said  Archbishop,  were  surreptitiously 
passed  in  the  late  Convocation,  without  due  consideration 
and  debate ;  others,  by  fear  and  compulsion,  were  sub 
scribed  unto  by  the  prelates  and  clerks  there  assembled, 
which  had  never  been  voted  and  passed  in  the  Convoca 
tion,  as  they  ought  to  have  been.  And  the  said  Archbishop 
hath  contrived  and  endeavoured  to  assure  and  confirm  the 
unlawful  and  exorbitant  power,  which  he  hath  usurped 
and  exercised  over  his  Majesty's  subjects,  by  a  wicked 
and  ungodly  oath  in  one  of  the  said  pretended  Canons 
enjoined  to  be  taken  by  all  the  clergy  and  many  of  the 
laity  of  this  kingdom. 

The  sixth  original : — 

He  hath  traitorously  assumed  to  himself  a  papal  and  tyran 
nical  power,  both  in  ecclesiastical  and  temporal  matters, 

1  ['  this '  in  margin.     Originally  '  the  '] 

01?  AKCHBISHOP  LAUD.  151 

over  his  Majesty's  subjects  in  this  realm  of  England,  and  Die 
in  other  places,  to  the  disherison  of  the  Crown,  dishonour  ePtimo> 
of  his  Majesty,  and  derogation  of  his  supreme  authority 
in  ecclesiastical  matters.  And  the  said  Archbishop  claims 
the  King's  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction,  as  incident  to  his 
episcopal  and  (140)  archiepiscopal  office  in  this  kingdom, 
and  doth  deny  the  same  to  bt  derived  from  the  Crown  of 
England,  which  he  hath  accordingly  exercised,  to  the 
high  contempt  of  his  Royal  Majesty,  and  to  the  destruc 
tion  of  divers  of  the  King's  liege  people,  in  their  persons 
and  estates. 

The  ninth  additional  Article  : — 

That  in  or  about  the  month  of  May,  1641  &,  presently  after 
the  dissolution  of  the  last  Parliament,  the  said  Archbishop, 
for  the  ends  and  purposes  aforesaid,  caused  a  Synod  or 
Convocation  of  the  Clergy  to  be  held  for  the  several  pro 
vinces  of  Canterbury  and  York ;  wherein  were  made  and 
established,  by  his  means  and  procurement,  divers  Canons 
and  Constitutions  ecclesiastical,  contrary  to  the  laws  of 
this  realm,  the  rights  and  privileges  of  Parliament,  and 
281  liberty  and  property  of  the  subject  •  tending  also  to  sedi 

tion,  and  of  dangerous  consequence.  And,  amongst  other 
things,  the  said  Archbishop  caused  a  most  dangerous  and 
illegal  oath  to  be  therein  made  and  contrived ;  the  tenor 
whereof  followeth  in  these  words  :  '  That  I,  A.  B.y  do 
swear,  that  I  do  approve  the  doctrine  and  discipline  or 
government  established  in  the  Church  of  England,  as 
containing  all  things  necessary  to  salvation :  and  that 
I  will  not  endeavour,  by  myself  or  any  other,  directly  or 
indirectly,  to  bring  in  any  Popish  doctrine,  contrary  to 
that  which  is  so  established :  nor  will  I  ever  give  my 
consent  to  alter  the  government  of  this  Church  by  arch 
bishops,  bishops,  deans,  and  archdeacons,  fyc.,  as  it  stands 
now  established,  and  as  by  right  it  ought  to  stand;  nor 
yet  ever  to  subject  it  to  the  usurpations  and  superstitions 
of  the  See  of  Rome.  And  all  these  things  I  do  plainly 
and  sincerely  acknowledge  and  swear,  according  to  the 
plain  and  common  sense  and  understanding  of  the  same 
*  '1640/  Rush. 


Die  words,  without  any  equivocation  or  mental  evasion,  or 

Septimo.  secret  reservation  whatsoever.     And  this  I  do  heartily, 

willingly,  and  truly,  upon  the  faith  of  a  Christian  :  So 
help  me  God  in  Jesus  Christ.'  Which  oath  the  said  Arch 
bishop  himself  did  take,  and  caused  divers  other  ministers 
of  the  Church  to  take  the  same,  upon  pain  of  suspension 
and  deprivation  of  their  livings,  and  other  severe  penalties ; 
and  did  also  cause  Godfrey,  then  Bishop  of  Gloucester,  to 
be  committed  to  prison  for  refusing  to  subscribe  to  the 
said  Canons,  and  to  take  the  said  oath ;  and  afterward 
the  said  Bishop  submitting  himself  to  take  the  said  oath, 
he  was  set  at  liberty. 

April  4,  On  Thursday,  April  4,  I  was  again  brought  to  the  House, 
made  a  sufficient  scorn  and  gazing-stock  to  the  people ;  and 
after  I  had  waited  some  hours,  was  sent  back,  by  reason  of 
other  business,  unheard :  but  ordered  to  appear  again  Mon- 

April  8.  day,  April  8.  Then  I  appeared  again,  and  was  used  by  the 
basest  of  the  people  as  before.  I  did  not  appear  any  day  but 
it  cost  me  six  or  seven  pound :  I  grew  into  want.  This  made 
my  counsel,  and  other  friends,  to  persuade  me,  the  next  time 
I  had  admittance  to  speak,  to  move  the  Lords  again  for  some 
necessary  allowance;  notwithstanding  my  former  petition 
had  been  rejected.  This  advice  I  meant  to  have  followed 
that  day :  but  after  some  hours'  attendance,  I  was  sent  back 
again  unheard,  and  ordered  to  come  again  on  Thursday, 

April  11.  April  11.  This  day  I  did  not  come  to  the  House;  a  war 
rant  being  sent  to  the  Tower,  which  stayed  me  till  Tuesday, 
April  16. 


282  CAP.  XXIX. 


THEN  I  appeared,  and  (as  I  remember)  here  Mr.  Maynard  Die 
left  [off,]  (save  that  now  and  then  he  interposed,  both  in  the  eptimo- 
reply  and  otherwise,)  and  Mr.  Nicolas,  a  man  of  another 
temper,  undertook  the  managing  of  the  evidence.  And  the  I. 
first  charge  was  concerning  the  late  Canons,  '  which  he  said 
were  against  law  to  sita,  the  (141)  Parliament  being  dis 
solved/  No,  my  Lords,  nothing  against  law  that  I  know. 
For  we  were  called  to  sit  in  Convocation,  by  a  different  writ 
from  that  which  called  us  '  as  bishops  to  the  Parliament/ 
And  we  could  not  rise,  till  his  Majesty  sent  us  another  writ 
to  discharge  us ;  and  this  is  well  known  to  the  judges,  and 
the  other  lawyers  here  present  * :  so  we  continued  sitting, 
though  the  Parliament  rose.  Nor  was  this  sitting  continued 
by  any  advice  or  desire  of  mine.  For  I  humbly  desired  a 
writ  to  dissolve  us :  but  the  best  counsel  then  present,  both  of 
judges,  and  other  lawyers,  assured  the  King  we  might  legally 
sit.  And  here  is  a  copy  attested  under  their  hands  b. 

Then  he  urged  out  of  my  Diary,  at  May  29,  1640,  that 
I  acknowledged  '  there  were  seventeen  canons  made,  which 
I  did  hope  would  be  useful  to  the  Church c/  'Tis  true,  my 
Lords,  I  did  hope  so.  And  had  I  not  hoped  it,  1  would  never 
have  passed  my  consent  unto  them.  And  when  I  writ  this, 
there  was  nothing  done  or  said  against  them.  And  if,  by 
any  inadvertency  or  human  frailty,  anything  erroneous  or 
unfit  have  slipped  into  those  Canons,  I  humbly  beseech  your 
Lps.  to  remember,  it  is  an  article  of  the  Church  of  England, 

1  ['  and  this  .  *  .  present :'  in  margin.  ] 

a  lege,  'For  the  making  of  which          b  Vide  supra,  post  init.    [vol.  iii. 
he   said   it  was  against  law  for  the      p.  286.] 
Convocation  to  sit.'  e  [Vol.  iii.  p.  236.] 


Die  '  that  General  Councils  may  err  d/  and  therefore  this  national 

Synod  may  mistake.     And  that  since  (if  any  error  be)  it  is 
not  wilful ;  it  may  be  rectified,  and  in  charity  passed  by. 

For  the  '  Bishop  of  Gloucester's  refusing  to  subscribe  the 
Canons,  and  take  the  oath ;'  which  is  here  said  by  the 
counsel,  but  no  proof  offered :  the  truth  is  this.  He  first 
pretended  (to  avoid  his  subscription)  that  we  could  not  sit, 
the  Parliament  risen.  He  was  satisfied  in  this  by  the  judges' 
hands.  Then  he  pretended  the  oath.  But  that  which  stuck 
in  his  stomach,  was  '  the  Canon  about  suppressing  of  the 
growth  of  Popery6/  For,  coming  over  to  me  to  Lambeth 
about  that  business,  he  told  me  he  would  be  torn  with  wild 
horses  before  he  would  subscribe  that  canon.  I  gave  him 
the  best  advice  I  could ;  but  his  carriage  was  such,  when  he 
came  into  the  Convocation,  that  I  was  forced  to  charge  him 
openly  with  it,  and  he  as  freely  acknowledged  it :  as  there  is 
plentiful  proof  of  bishops  and  other  divines  then  present. 
And  '  for  his  Lp's.  being  after  put  to  take  the  oath/  (which 
was  also  urged,)  it  was  thus.  I  took  myself  bound  •  to 
acquaint  his  Majesty  with  this  proceeding  of  my  Ld.  of 
Gloucester's,  and  did  so.  But  all  that  was  after  done  about 
his  commitment  first,  and  his  release  after,  when  he  had 
taken  the  oath,  was  done  openly  at  a  full  Council-table,  and 
his  Majesty  present,  and  can  no  way  be  charged  upon  me,  as  283 
my  act.  For  it  was  my  duty  to  let  his  Majesty  know  it,  to 
prevent  further  danger  then  also  discovered.  But  I  am  here 
to  defend  myself,  not  to  accuse  any  man  else. 

Next  he  urged,  '  that  I  had  interlined  the  original  copy  of 
the  Canons  with  my  own  hand/  But  this  is  clearly  a  mis 
take,  if  not  a  wilful  one.  For  perusing  the  place,  I  find  the 
interlining  is  not  in  my  hand,  but  my  hand  is  to  it;  as 
(I  humbly  conceive)  it  was  fit  it  should.  And  the  words  are 
in  the  Ratification  of  the  Canons  a,  and  therefore  were  neces 
sarily  to  be  in  the  original,  howsoever  slipped  in  the  writing 
of  them. 

As  for  the  oath  so  bitterly  spoken  of  at  the  Bar,  and  in  the 

1  ['  Canons,'  originally  '  Articles/] 

Art,  21.  «  Can.  3. 


Articles ;  either  it  was  made  according  to  law,  or  else  we  Die 
were  wholly  misled  by  precedent,  and  that  such  as  was  never  SePtimo- 
excepted  against.  For  in  the  Canons  made  in  King  James 
his  time,  there  was  an  oath  made  against  simony f,  and  an 
oath  for  churchwardens V  "and  an  oath  about  licences  for 
marriages  h,  and  an  oath  for  judges  in  ecclesiastical  courts  *  i 
and  some  of  these  oaths  as  dangerous  as  this  is  accounted 
to  be.  And  all  these  established  by  no  other  authority  than 
these  late  were/'  And  yet  neither  those  Canons  nor  those 
oaths  were  ever  declared  illegal  by  any  ensuing  Parliament, 
nor  the  makers  of  them  accused  of  any  crime,  much  less  of 
treason.  So  that  we  had  in  this  Synod  unblamed  precedent 
for  what  we  did,  as  touching  our  power  of  doing  it. 

(142)  But,  after  all  this,  he  said  he  would  pass  these  things 
by,  (that  is,  when  he  had  made  them  as  odious  as  he  could,) 
and  would  charge  nothing  upon  me  but  the  '  votes  of  both 
Houses,'  namely,  '  That  these  Canons  contain  matters  con 
trary  to  the  King's  prerogative,  to  the  fundamental  laws  of 
the  realm,  to  the  rights  of  Parliaments,  to  the  propriety  and 
liberty  of  the  subject,  and  matters  tending  to  sedition,  and 
of  dangerous  consequence/  So  these  votes  of  the  honourable 
Houses  made  so  long  after,  (and  therefore  cannot  well  be  an 
evidence  against  the  making  of  that  which  was  done  so  long 
before,)  is  the  task  lying  now  upon  me  to  answer;  which, 
with  your  Lps\  honourable  favour,  I  shall  in  all  humbleness 
address  myself  unto. 

Before  these  words  were  well  out  of  my  mouth,  Mr.  Nicolas 
with  much  earnestness  interposed ;  '  That  he  hoped  their  Lps. 
would  not  endure  that  '  the  solemn  votes  of  both  Houses 
should  be  called  into  question  by  any  delinquent,  and  was 
sure  the  House  of  Commons  would  not  endure  it.'  Upon 
this  the  Lords  presently  gave  their  resolution,  that  I  might 
not  speak  to  anything  that  was  declared  by  votes ;  but  was 
to  answer  only  to  the  fact,  whether  I  made  the  Canons  or 
no  *.  To  this,  with  leave  humbly  asked,  I  replied,  That 
if  I  might  not  answer  to  the  votes,  I  must  yield  the  evidence; 

1  ['  declared  by  ...  or  no.'  in  margin.     Originally  '  voted.'] 

{  Can.  40.  h  Can.  103. 

»  Can.  118.  *  Can.  127. 


Die  which  I  could  not  do :  and  that  if  I  might  answer,  I  must 

Septimo.  Dispute  the  votes,  which  their  Lps.  resolved  I  should  not  do  : 
that  then  I  was  in  a  perplexity,  and  must  necessarily  offend 
either  way.  And  therefore  humbly  besought  them,  to  con 
sider  not  my  case  only,  but  their  own  too.  For  I  did  con 
ceive  it  would  concern  them  in  honour,  as  much  as  me  in 
safety :  that  no  charge  might  be  brought  against  me  in  that 
great  Court,  to  which  I  should  not  be  suffered  to  make  284 
answer:  or  else  that  they  in  honour  would  not  judge  me  for 
that,  to  which  my  answer  is  not  suffered  to  be  given.  With 
this,  that  all  these  Canons  were  made  in  open  and  full  Con 
vocation,  and  are  acts  of  that  body,  and  cannot  be  ascribed 
to  me,  though  president  of  that  Synod,  but  are  the  joint  acts 
of  the  whole  body :  so  '  by  me '  they  were  not  made ;  which  is 
my  answer. 

"  And  according  to  this  I  framed  my  answer  to  Mr.  Brown's 
summary  of  my  charge,  both  touching  the  Canons  in  general, 
and  concerning  the  instance  before  given  about  the  Bishop  of 

ff  But  though  I  was  not  allowed  there  to  make  any  further 
answer  in  defence  of  these  Canons;  nor  can  hold  it  fit  to 
insert  here  so  long  an  answer  as  these  votes  require ;  I  hum 
bly  desire  the  courteous  reader,  if  he  please,  to  look  upon  the 
answer  which  I  have  made  to  a  speech  of  Mr.  Nathaniel 
Fynes  k,  in  the  House  of  Commons,  against  these  Canons. 
In  which  answer,  I  humbly  conceive,  I  have  satisfied  what 
soever  these  votes  contain  against  them.  Howsoever,  I  can 
not  but  observe  this  in  present.  The  words  in  the  sixth 
original  Article  are  as  they  are  above  cited  :  {  That  the  late 
Canons  contain  matters  contrary  to  the  King's  prerogative, 
the  laws/  &c.  But  in  the  ninth  additional,  all  the  rest  of 
the  exceptions  are  in  against  them,  but  these  words  about 
4  the  King's  prerogative '  are  quite  left  out l.  I  would  fain 
know,  if  I  could,  what  is  the  reason  of  this  omission  in  these 
added  Articles.  Is  it  for  shame,  because  there  was  a  pur 
pose  to  charge  me,  (as  Sergeant  Wild  did  in  his  speech  the 

1   ['  And  according  .  .  .  Gloucester.'  on  opposite  page.] 

k   Made  December   14,  1640,  and      p.  105. 
extant  in  Eushworth,  par.  iii.  vol.  i.          '   Et  Art.  ii.  additionalis. 


first  day,)  that  I  laboured  '  to  advance  the  King's  prerogative  Die 
above  the   law?'     To   advance  it,   and  yet   made    contrary  Sepfcimo> 
Canons  against  it ;  which  is  the  way  to  destroy  it  ?     What 
pretty  nonsense  is  this  ?  Or  is  it  because  the  framers  of  these 
additionals,  (whom  I  conceive  were  some  Committee,  with  the 
help  of  Mr.  Pryn,)  thought  the  time  was  come,  or  coming, 
in  which  the  King  should  have  no  more  prerogative  ?     Or  if 
there  be  a  third  reason ;  let  them  give  it  themselves/'' 

This  was  all  concerning  the  Canons.  Then  followed  the 
sixth  original  Article  about  '  my  assuming  of  papal  power  •' 
"  where  Mr.  Brown,  in  summing  up  of  his  charge,  was  pleased 
to  say,  fthat  no  Pope  claimed  so  much  as  I  had  done/  But 
he  was  herein  much  mistaken.  For  never  any  Pope  claimed 
so  little.  For  he  that  claimed  least,  claimed  it  in  his  own 
right,  which  was  none ;  whereas  I  claimed  nothing  but  in  the 
King's  right,  and  by  virtue  of  his  concession.  Between  which 
there  is  a  vast  latitude  l."  The  first  proof  upon  this  Article, 
was  read  out  of  certain  letters  sent  unto  me  by  the  Uni 
versity  of  Oxford,  I  being  then  their  Chancellor.  Which  great 
titles  were  urged  to  prove  my  '  assuming  of  papal  power, 
because  I  did  rot  check  them  in  my  answers  to  those  letters/ 
(1.)  The  first  title  was  Sanctitas  tua™,  which  Mr.  Nicolas 
said,  was  '  the  Pope's  own  title/  But  he  is  deceived.  For 
the  title  was  commonly  given  to  other  bishops  also  2,  clean 
through  the  primitive  Church,  both  Greek  and  Latin.  "  He 
replied  in  great  heat,  (as  his  manner  it  seems  is,)  that  '  'tis 
blasphemy  to  give  that  title  (Sanctitas}  in  the  abstract,  to 
285  any  (143)  but  God/  And  though  by  the  course  of  the  Court 
I  might  not  answer  then  to  the  reply,  yet  now  I  may.  And 
must  tell  Mr.  Nicolas,  that  'tis  a  great  presumption  for  him, 
a  lawyer,  and  no  studied  divine,  to  charge  blasphemy  upon 
all  the  Fathers  of  the  primitive  Church.  'Tis  given  to 
St.  Augustine  by  Hilarius  and  Evodius3n,  and  in  the  abstract. 

1  ['  where  Mr.  Brown,  .  .  .  latitude.'  on  opposite  page.] 

2  ['other  bishops  also,' in  margin.     Originally  written  '  bishops,'] 

3  ['Hilarius. and  Evodius,'  in  margin.] 

m  [See  the  Letter  of  the  University,  omnibus  nota  est,  parvitati  meae  per- 

May'28, 1635.  Hist,  of  Chancellorship,  suasit." — Hilarius  ad  August.]  apud 

VY'orks,  vol.  v.  p.  114.  J  [S.]  Aug.  Epist.  Ixxxviii.  [(clvi.  Ben.) 

"   ["  Sanctitatis    tuse    gratia,    quse  Op.,  torn.  ii.    col.  810.  A.     "  Pridem 


Die  And  (which  is  the  charge  laid  to  me)   St.  Augustine  never 

checks  at,  or  finds  fault  with  the  title,  nor  with  them  for 
writing  it.  And  St.  Augustine  himself  gives  that  title  to 
Evodius  °j  answering  his  letters,  which  I  was  not  to  do  to 
theirs.  And  after  that  to  Quintianus  1  P.  Neither  is  anything 
more  common  than  this  style  among  the  Fathers ;  as  all 
learned  men  know.  And  'tis  commonly  given  by  S.  Gregory 
the  Great  i,  to  divers  bishops  :  who,  being  Pope  himself, 
would  not  certainly  have  given  away  his  own  title  (had  it 
been  peculiar  to  him)  to  any  other  bishop.  Nor  would  any 
of  the  Fathers  have  given  this  epithet  to  their  brethren,  had 
any  savour  of  blasphemy  been  about  it1'."  But  there  is  a  two 
fold  holiness,  the  one  original,  absolute,  and  essential ;  and 
that  is  in  God  only,  and  incommunicable  to  any  creature : 
the  other  derivative  and  relative;  and  that  is  found  in  the 
creatures,  both  things  and  persons :  or  else  God  should  have 
no  saints,  no  holy  ones.  For  no  man  can  be  said  to  be 
sanctus,  '  holy,'  but  he  who  in  some  degree  hath  sanctitatem, 
'  holiness/  residing  in  him.  And  this  I  answered  at  the  pre 
sent.  "  But,  according  to  Mr.  Nicolas  his  divinity,  we  shall 
learn  in  time  to  deny  the  immortality  of  the  soul.  For 
immortality  in  the  abstract  is  applied  to  God  only.  1  Tim.  vi. 
'  Who  only  hath  immortality  S.J  Therefore,  if  it  may  not  in 
an  under  and  a  qualified  sense,  by  participation,  be  applied 
to  the  creature,  the  soul  of  man  cannot  be  immortal." 

(2.)  The  second  title  is,  Spiritu  Sancto  effusissime  plenus  i. 

1  ['himself  gives.  .  .  .  Quintianus.'  on  opposite  page.     Originally,  'himself 
gives  that  title  to  Evodius,  and  after  that  to  Quintianus.'] 

qusestiones     misi      ad      sanctitatem  r  The  managers  against  the  Areh- 

tuam."— Evodius  ad  August.  Epist.]  bishop  in  another  place  pretend,  that 

xcviii.  [clxiii.  Ben.  ibid.  col.  856.  C.]  this   title   was  never    given   to   any 

0  ["  Si  ea  quse  me  magis  occupant  English  bishop  at  least.     But  herein 
.  .  .  Sanctitas  tua  nosse  tanti  habet."  they  are  much  mistaken.     For  it  was 
— S.]  Aug.  Ep.  cii.  [(clix.  Ben.)  Op.,  often  given  to  them.    To  produce  but 
torn.  ii.  col.  901.  C.]  one  instance  :  Pope  Leo  III.  gave  this 

P  ["  Portant   sane   secum  reliquias  title  to  Ethelard,  Archbishop  of  Can- 

beatissimi   et   gloriosissimi    martyris  terbury,  and  that  in  a  letter  wrote  to 

Stephaui,  quas  non  ignorat  Sanctitas  Kenulphus,   King  of  Mercia. — Angl. 

vestra."— S.]  Aug.  Ep.  ciii.   [(ccxii.  Sacr.   par.  i.  p.  460.   [Lond.  1691.1— 

Ben.)  ibid.  col.  1195.  B.]  H.  W. 

1  Greg.  Eulogio  Episcopo  Alexan-  8  1  Tim.  vi.  16. 

drino.     Apud  H.  Spelman.  in  Concil.  *  [See  the  Letter  of  the  University, 

p.  80.  [Lond.  1639.]  Et  Episc.  Arela-  May  28,  1635.  Hist,  of  Chancellorship, 

tensi.  ibid.  75.  Works,  vol.  v.  p.  113.] 


My  Lds.,  I  had  sent  them  many  hundred  manuscripts,  and  Die 
in  many  languages ;    upon   this,   in    allusion  to  the  gift  of ' ' 
tongues,  (and  it  was  about  Pentecost,  too,  that  I  sent  them,) 
the  luxuriant  pen  of  the  University  orator  ran  upon  these 
phrases,   which   I  could   neither   foresee,  before  they  were 
written,   nor  remedy  after.      And    finding  fault    could    not 
remedy  that  which  was  past.     Besides,  all  these  letters  were 
in  answer  to  mine :   I  was  to  answer  none  of  theirs.     That 
might  have  made  me  work  enough,  had  I  wanted  any. 

(3.)  The  third  style  is  Summus  Pontifex.  But  this  was  in 
my  L.  of  London's  letters,  and  he  must  answer,  if  anything 
be  amiss.  But  Pontifex,  and  Summus  too,  is  no  unusual 
style  to  and  of  the  chief  prelate  in  any  nation. 

(4.)  The  fourth  style  is  Archangelus,  et  ne  quid  nimis11.  Yes, 
sure,  the  meanest  of  these  titles  is  multum  nimis,  far  too 
much,  applied  to  my  person  and  unworthiness  :  yet  a  great 
sign  it  is,  that  I  deserved  very  well  of  that  University,  in  the 
place  I  then  bare ;  or  else  they  would  never  have  bestowed 
286  such  titles  upon  me.  And  if  they  did  offend,  in  giving  such 
an  unworthy  man  such  high  language,  why  are  not  they 
called  in  question  for  their  own  fault  ? 

(5.)  The  last  which  I  remember  is,  Quo  rectior  non  stat 
regula,  &c.v  And  this  is  no  more  than  an  absolute  hyperbole ; 
a  high  one,  I  confess,  yet  as  high  are  found  in  all  rhetorical 
authors  :  and  what  should  make  that  blasphemy  in  an  Uni 
versity  orator  which  is  everywhere  common,  and  iiot  only 
allowed,  but  commendable,  I  know  not.  "  Especially  since 
the  rule  of  the  interpretation  of  them  is  as  well  known  as  the 
figure.  Where  the  words  are  not  to  be  understood  in  their 
proper  and  literal  sense,  but  as  St.  Aug.  speaks,  when  that 
which  is  spoken  longe  est  amplius,  is  far  larger  than  that  which 
is  signified  by  itx."  And  if  I  had  assumed  any  of  these  titles 
to  myself,  which  I  am,  and  ever  was,  far  from  doing ;  yet  'tis 
one  thing  to  assume  papal  title ;  and  another  to  assume 
papal  power,  which  is  the  thing  charged ;  though  I  thank 

u  [See  the  Letter  of  the  University,  que  tropica  est,  non  propria  ....  Iste 

of  July  9,  1636,  ibid.  p.  140.]  autem  tropus,  id  est  modus  locutionis, 

v  [Seethe  Letter  of  the  University,  fit,  quando  id  quod  dicitur  longe  est 

Nov.  10,  1640,  ibid.  p.  295.]  amplius,  quam  quod  eo  dicto  signifi- 

1  ["Ea  locutione  dictum  est,  quam  catur."]  S.  Aug.  [lib.]xvi.  [de]Civ.  Dei, 

Grseci  vocant  hyperbolen  ;  quae  uti-  cap.  xxi.  [Op.,  torn.  vii.  col.  690.  C.] 


Die  God  I  did  neither.  "  If  I  have  here  omitted  any  title,  it  is 

mere  forgetfulness ;  for  one  part  or  other  of  the  answers  given 
will  reach  it,  whatever  it  be.  And  as  I  told  Mr.  Browne, 
when  he  charged  this  on  me,  Dr.  Strowd,  the  University 
orator  y,  who  writ  those  letters,  and  gave  those  titles,  was 
called  up  before  a  Committee  of  this  Parliament,  examined 
about  them,  acquitted,  and  dismissed1." 

(6.)  These  titles  from  the  letters  being  past,  he  quoted 
another,  which  he  called  a  blasphemous  speech  too,  out  of 
'  my  book  against  Fisher ;  where/  he  said,  '  I  approved  of 
Anselme,  an  enemy  to  the  Crown;  and  took  on  me  to  be 
Patriarch  of  this  other  world  z.'  Let  any  man  look  into  that 
place  of  my  book :  and  he  shall  find  that  I  made  use  of  that 
passage  only  to  prove  that  the  Pope2  could  not  be  appealed 
unto  out  of  England,  according  to  their  own  doctrine  :  which 
I  hope  is  no  blasphemy.  And  for  St.  Anselme,  (144)  howsoever 
he  was  swayed  with  the  corruptions  of  his  time,  yet  was  he 
in  other  things  worthy  the  testimony  which  the  authors  by 
me  cited  give  him.  "And  if  any  man  be  angry  that  'the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  is  called  the  Patriarch  of  this 
other  world/  he  may  be  pleased  to  remember,  that  St.  Jerom 
gives  St.  Augustine,  who  was  Bishop  of  Hippo,  and  no  Arch 
bishop,  a  greater  title  than  that.  For  he  writes,  Beatissimo 
Papce  Augustino,  more  than  once  and  again,  as  appears  in  his 
epistles  to  St.  Augustine 3  a." 

(7.)  To  these  Sir  Nathaniel  Brent's  testimony  is  produced  : 
who  says,  that  he  overheard  me  say  to  another,  '  that  T  would 
not  so  easiN  quit  the  plenitude  of  my  power ;  or  to  that 
effect/  He  confesses  he  was  coming  in,  and  finding  me 
speaking  with  another,  made  stay,  and  stood  afar  off,  '  and 
knows  not  of  what  I  spake/  (for  so  he  said)  but  overheard  the 
words.  I  beseech  your  Lps.,  observe  this  witness.  He  con 
fesses  he  knows  not  of  what  I  spake,  and  yet  comes  here  upon 

1  ['  If  I  have  .  .  .  dismissed.'  on  opposite  page.] 

2  ['  that  the  Pope '  in  marg.] 

3  ['  of  Canterbury  ...  St.  Augustine.'  on  opposite  page.] 

r  [William  Strode,  Canon  of  Ch,  xi.  [(Ixxv.  Ben.)  Op.,  torn.  ii.  col.  251. 

Ch.  (Wood,  Ath.  Ox.  iii.  151.)]  B.],xiii.  [(Ixviii.  Ben.)  ibid. col. 233. D.), 

1  Cont.  Fisher,  §  25,  p.  171.  [p.  190,  xiv.  [(Ixxii.  Ben.)  ibid.  col.  241.  B.J, 

Oxf.  1849.]  xvii.  [(xxxix.  Ben.)  ibid.  col.  124.  A.], 

"  S.  Hieron.  apud  [S.]  Aug.  Epist.  xviii.  [(Ixxxi.  Ben.)  ibid.  col.  283.  A.] 


his  oath,  to  testify  of  plenitude  of  power  in  relation  to  my  Die 
assuming  papal  power.  If  he  mean  not  this,  his  testimony  ePtimo- 
is  nothing;  for  plenitude  of  power  may  extend  to  many  other 
things ;  and  I  might  justly  say,  (if  I  said  it,)  '  that  I  would 
not  easily  part  with  the  plenitude  of  my  power/  in  relation 
to  other  bishops  of  my  province,  who  by  law  have  not  so  full 
power  as  I  have.  But  if  he  did  mean  this,  then  his  testimony 
287  is  worse  than  nothing.  Nothing,  in  regard  he  confesses  he 
knows  not  of  what  I  was  speaking.  And  worse  than  nothing, 
that,  not  knowing,  he  would  give  such  a  testimony  upon  oath. 
"  [As  for  the  statutes  themselves,  there  was  scarce  one  urged 
against  me ;  but  it  was  either  a  statute,  or  a  prescription  of 
that  University,  long  before  I  was  born  into  the  world ;  and 
could  not  therefore  be  of  my  new-making.  And  this  was  my 
answer  to  Mr.  Browne  in  the  House  of  Commons.  And 
such  bannition,  discommoning,  and  the  like,  are  well  known 

The  next  charge  of  this  day  was,  that   '  I  went  about  to   II. 
exempt  the  clergy  from  the  civil  magistrate/ 

1.  The  first  witness  is  Mr.  Pincen;  he  says,  he  heard  me 
say  at  the  High- Commission,  'That  the  clergy  were  now 
debased ;  that  heretofore  it  was  otherwise,  and  I  hope  to  see 
it  so  again.'  Truly,  my  Lords,  if  I  did  say  thus,  which  is 
more  than  I  can  call  to  memory,  I  spake  truth ;  they  were 
debased ;  and  I  did  hope  to  see  it  otherwise.  For  the  de 
basing  of  the  clergy  will  make  their  office  and  their  doctrine 
base,  as  well  as  their  persons.  But  here  is  not  a  word  of 
freeing  them  from  laws  or  the  temporal  magistrate.  It  was 
replied,  he  did  mention  the  '  civil  magistrate .'  "  If  he  did,  he 
mentions  no  time,  by  which  I  might  be  enabled  to  make 
counterproof.  He  is  single.  They  are  words,  and  if  within 
the  statute,  then  triable  by  it  within  six  months.  And  I 
desire  this  grave  gentleman  to  consider  his  oath :  for  if  I 
spake  of  any  such  exemption,  I  must  speak  against  my  con 
science  and  judgment,  which  I  humbly  thank  God  I  use  not 

1  ['As  for  ....  to  be. '  on  opposite  page.  '  P.  157'  is  written  against  this 
passage,  in  Archbishop  Laud's  hand.  See  below,  p.  189.] 

b  These  six  lines  are  inserted  out  of     versity,  which  followeth  afterwards. — 
place,  and  belong  clearly  to  his  defence      W.  S.  A.  C. 
of  making  new  statutes  for  the  Uni- 

LAUD.  —  VOL.  IV.  ]\I 


Die  to  do.      Nor  is  it  altogether  impossible  for  the  civil  magis- 

3ao'     trate  sometimes  to  oppress  poor  clergymen.    But  a  little  will 

be  thought  too  much  of  this.     And  therefore  to  Mr.  Browne's 

summary  charge  I  gave  the  former  answer,  that  I  spake  of 

exemption  from  oppression,  not  from  law  l." 

2.  The  second  witness  was  Alderman  Railton,  about  the 
carrying  up  of  the  sword  in  the  church,  when  he  was  Ld. 
Mayor.     He  says,  I  once  sent  him  word  about  it,  but  knows 
not  by  whom 2,  and  after  heard  no  more  of  it,  but  refers 
himself  to  Mr.  Marsh.      He  says,  'there  was  an  order  of  the 
Council- table,  May  3,   1633,  concerning  the  submitting  of 
the  sword  in  time  and  place  of  divine  service/     If  an  order 
of  Council,  then  was  it  no  act  of  mine,  as  I  have  often  pleaded, 
and  must  as  often  as  it  comes.     He  says  further,  that  I  spake 
these  words,  or  to  this  effect ;  ( That  the  Church  had  been  low 
for  these  hundred  years ;  but  I  hoped  it  would  flourish  again 
in  another  hundred/     But  here's  no  one  word  of  exemption 
from  civil  magistracy.     And  I  hope  your  Lps.  will  take  wit 
nesses  as  they  speak,  not  as  men  shall  infer,  and  descant 
upon  them.     "  And  then,  my  Lords,  under  favour,  I  see  no 
harm  in  the  words."  Only  I  shall  recal  my  hope  :  for  if  I  had 
then  any  hope  to  see  it  nourish  in  another  hundred  years, 
'tis  that  which  I  cannot  hope  for  now.     He  says,  '  there  was 
a  reference  to  the  Council  on  both  sides,  and  that  under  that 
reference  the  business  died/  And  if  it  died  then,  what  makes 
it  here  before  the  resurrection  ?     Yea,  but  says  Mr.  Nicolas, 
'  here's  agitation  about  the  submitting  of  the  sword,  which 
is  the  emblem  of  temporal  power/     But  neither  to  foreign  288 
nor  home  power,  but  only  to  God ;  and  that  in  the  place,  and 
at  the  performance  of  His  holy  worship.     At  which  time  and 
place    Christian 3    kings    submit   themselves,    and   therefore 
cannot  stand  upon  the  emblems  of  their  power.     Nor  would 
the  Lords  of  the  Council  have  made  either  order  or  reference, 
had  there  been  anything  of  danger,  or  against  law,  in  this 
kind  of  submitting.      Mr.  Yorke  was  produced   as  another 
witness;  but  said  just  the   same  with  Marsh;  and  so  the 
same  answer  served  him. 
III.        Then  followed  a  charge  about  the  Charter  of  York  to  be 

1  ['Nor  is  it  ...  law.'  on  opposite  pa^e.] 

2  ['  but  knows  not  by  whom/  in  margin.]  3  ['  Christian '  in  margin.] 


renewed ;  aud  that  I  did  labour  to  have  the  Archbishop  of  Die 
York  his  Chancellor,  and  some  of  the  residentiaries,  named  in  eptl1 
it  l  to  be  justices  of  peace  within  the  city.  To  (145)  prove  this. 
Alderman  Hoyle c  is  produced  :  who  says,  '  there  was  an  order 
of  the  Council  about  this,  but  cannot  say  that  I  procured  it/ 
(so  far,  then,  this  proof  reaches  not  me,)  ( for  the  bishop  his 
chancellor,  and  some  of  the  residentiaries,  to  be  justices  of 
peace  within  the  city/  If  I  were  of  this  opinion,  (as  then 
advised,)  I  am  sure  there's  no  treason  in  it,  and  I  believe  no 
crime.  And  under  your  Lps/  favour,  I  could  not  but  think 
it  would  have  made  much  peace,  and  done  much  good,  in  all 
the  cities  of  England  where  cathedrals  are.  Lastly,  he  says, 
'  there  was  a  debauched  man  committed  about  breach  of  the 
Sabbath,  and  being  casually  smothered,  I  should  say,  they 
deserved  to  be  hanged  that  killed  him/  Concerning  this 
man;  he  lost  his  life,  that's  confessed.  His  debauchery,  what 
it  was,  is  not  proved.  And  were  he  never  so  disorderly,  I 
am  sure  he  was  not,  without  legal  trial,  to  be  shut  up  into  a 
house  and  smothered.  That  is  against  both  law  and  con 
science.  And  the  officers  then  in  being  had  reason  to  smother 
the  business  as  much  as  they  could.  And,  it  may  be,  deserved 
somewhat ;  if  not  that  which  this  alderman  says  I  said,  '  to 
his  best  remembrance/  For  so,  and  with  no  more  certainty, 
he  expressed  it.  This  I  am  sure  I  said,  that  if  the  bishop,  or 
any  of  the  Church  had  been  then  in  their  charter,  the  poor 
man's  life  had  not  been  lost. 

The  fourth  charge  was  just  of  the  same  nature,  concerning  IV. 
the  charge  of  Shrewsbury.  For  this  there  were  produced 
two  witnesses,  Mr.  Lee  and  Mr.  Mackworth  :  but  they  make 
up  but  one  between  them.  For  Mr.  Lee  could  say  nothing2, 
but  what  he  acknowledges  he  heard  from  Mr.  Mackworth. 
And  Mr.  Mackworth  says  first,  that  fthe  schoolmaster's 
business  was  referred  to  other  lords  and  myself.'  That's  no 
crime ;  and  to  my  knowledge,  that  has  been  a  troublesome 
business  for  these  thirty  years.  He  says,  ( I  caused  that 
there  should  go  a  Quo  warranto  against  the  town/  This  is 
but  as  Mr.  Owen  informed  him,  so  no  proof.  Beside,  'tis  no 
crime,  being  a  referee,  if  I  gave  legal  reason  for  it.  Nor  is 

1  ['  named  iii  it'  in  margin.]  2  ['could  say  nothing,'  in  margin.] 

c  [M.  P.  for  the  city  of  York.] 



Die  it  any  crime,  '  that  the  bishop  and  his  chancellor  should  be 

mo'  j  ustices  within  the  town  ;'  as  is  aforesaid  in  the  case  of  York  : 
considering  especially,  that  then  many  clergymen  bare  that 
office  in  divers  counties  of  England.  He  adds,  '  that  an  old 
alderman  gave  fifty  pound  to  St.  PauPs.  But  out  of  what 
consideration  I  know  not,  nor  doth  he  speak  :  and  if  every 
alderman  in  the  town  would  have  given  me  as  much  to  that 
use,  I  would  have  taken  it,  and  thanked  them  for  it.  Then  289 
he  says,  '  there  was  an  order  from  all  the  lords  referees,  for 
settling  all  things  about  their  charter.'  So,  by  his  own  con 
fession,  the  whole  business  was  transacted  publicly,  and  by 
persons  of  great  honour ;  and  nothing  charged  upon  my  par 
ticular.  '  If  Mr.  Owen  sent  me  in  a  butt  of  sack,  and  after 
put  it  upon  the  town  account/  (for  so  he  also  says,)  '  Mr. 
Owen  did  ill  in  both  ;  but  I  knew  of  neither.  And  this  the 
counsel  in  their  reply  said  they  urged  not  in  that  kind. 
Lastly,  the  charter  itself  was  read*  to  both  points,  '  of  the 
bishop's  and  his  chancellor's  l  being  justices  of  peace  within 
the  town,  and  the  not  bearing  up  of  the  sword/  To  both 
which  I  have  answered  already.  And  I  hope  your  Lps. 
cannot  think  his  Majesty  would  have  passed  such  a  charter : 
or  that  his  learned  counsel  durst  have  put  it  to  him,  had  this 
thing  been  such  a  crime  as  'tis  here  made. 

V.  The  next  charge  was  out  of  my  Diary,  at  March  5,  1635. 
The  words  are,  '  William  Juxou,  Ld.  Bp.  of  London,  made 
Ld.  High  Treasurer  of  England.  No  Churchman  had  it 
since  II.  VII.  time.  I  pray  God  bless  him  to  carry  it  so, 
that  the  Church  may  have  honour,  and  the  King  and  the 
State  service  and  contentment  by  it.  And  now  if  the  Church 
will  not  hold  up  themselves  under  God,  I  can  do  no  more  d.' 
I  can  see  no  treason  in  this,  nor  crime  neither.  And  though 
that  which  I  did  to  help  on  this  business  was  very  little ;  yet 
aim  I  had  none  in  it,  but  the  service  of  the  King,  and  the 
good  of  the  Church.  And  I  am  most  confident  it  would  have 
been  both,  had  not  such  troublesome  times  followed,  as  did. 
VI.  Then  they  instanced  in  the  case  of  Mr.  Newcomen.  But 
that  cause  being  handled  before  e,  they  did  only  refer  the 
Lords  to  their  notes :  and  so  did  I  to  my  former  answers. 

1  ['  and  his  chancellor's  '  in  margin.] 
d  [Vol.  iii,  p.  226.]  e  [See  above,  p.  118.'] 


Then  followed  the  case  of  Thorn  and  Middleton  ;  which 
were  fined  in  the  High- Commission  about  some  clergymen's 
business ;  Thome  being  (146)  constable :  the  witnesses  in 
this  case  are  three. 

1.  The  first  is  Huntsford  (if  I  took  his  name  right f)  :  and 
for  the  censure  of  these  men,  he  confesses,  it  was  in  and  by 
the  High-Commission ;  and  so  no  act  of  mine  (as  I  have 
often  pleaded)  :  but  then  he  says,  that  I  there  spake  these 
words,  '  That  no  man  of  their  rank  should  meddle  with  men 
in  Holy  Orders/  First,  he  is  in  this  part  of  the  charge 
single,  and  neither  of  the  other  witnesses  comes  in  to  him. 
Secondly,  I  humbly  desire  the  proceedings  of  the  High- Com 
mission  may  be  seen  (which  are  taken  out  of  our  hands). 
For  so  far  as  I  can  remember  anything  of  this  cause,  the 
minister,  Mr.  Lewis,  had  hard  measure.  And  perhaps  there 
upon  I  might  say,  '  That  men  of  their  rank  should  not  in 
such  sort  meddle  with  men  in  Holy  Orders/  But  to  tax  the 
proceedings  of  a  violent  busy  constable,  was  not  to  exempt 
the  clergy  from  civil  magistracy. 

Upon  this  he  falls  just  upon  the  same  words,  and  says, 
e  that  I  uttered  them  about  their  offering  to  turn  out  a 
corrector  from  the  printing-house/  This  corrector  was  a 
minister,  and  a  wrell  deserving  man.  The  trust  of  the  press 
was  referred  to  the  High-Commission  Court1.  And  I  hope 
your  Lps.  will  not  think,  that  not  to  suffer  the  printers  to 
turn  out  a  deserving  man  at  their  pleasure,  is  'to  exempt 
the  clergy  from  the  civil  magistrate/  The  business,  my 
290  Lords,  was  this.  This  corrector  was  principally  entertained 
for  the  Latin  and  Greek  press  especially,  which  I  had  then, 
not  without  great  pains  and  some  cost,  erected.  They  were 
desirous  to  keep  only  one  for  the  English,  and  him  at  the 
cheapest.  Among  them  their  negligence  was  such,  as  that 
there  were  found  above  a  thousand  faults  in  two  editions  of 
the  Bible  and  Common-Prayer  Book.  And  one  which  caused 
this  search  was  that  in  Exod.  xx.,  where  they  had  shamefully 
printed 2,  '  Thou  shalt  commit  adultery/  For  this  the  masters 

1  ['the  High-Commission  Court.'  in  margin,  correcting  some  words  which 
are  crossed  out,  and  which  appear  to  be,  '  me.  and  my  Lord  of  London.'] 

2  ['  where  they  had  shamefully  printed/  in  marg.    Orig. '  They  had  printed,'] 

[Joseph  Hunscot,  the  Printer,  mentioned  above,  p.  70.     See  also  below, 
p.  185.] 


Die  of  the  printing-house  were  called  into  the  High-Commission, 

K  eptimo.  an(j  censure^  as  they  well  deserved  it.  As  for  this  corrector 
whom  they  would  have  heaved  out,  they  never  did  so  much 
as  complain  of  him  to  any  that  had  power  over  the  press,  till 
this  fell  upon  themselves  for  so  gross  an  abuse.  Nor  did  they 
after  this  proceed  against  him,  to  make  him  appear  faulty  ; 
and  till  that  were  done,  we  could  not  punish.  And  for  this 
business  of  the  press,  he  is  single  too.  And  I  have  told  your 
Lps.  that  which  is  a  known  truth.  "  And  Hunsford,  being 
bit  in  his  credit  and  purse,  and  friends,  by  that  censure,  for 
so  gross  an  abuse  of  the  Church  and  religion,  labours  to 
fasten  his  fangs  upon  me  in  this  way." 

2.  The  second  witness  is  Mr.  Bland.     But  all  that  he  says 
is,  that  f  there  was  once  a  dismission  of  this  cause  out  of  the 
court,  and  that  though  I  disliked  it l,  yet  I  gave  way  to  it, 
because  all  parties  were  agreed/     And  no  word  of  proof,  that 
I  was  any  cause  of  bringing  it  back  into  the  court  again. 
What's  my  fault  in  this  ? 

3.  The  third  witness  was  Thorn  in  his  own  cause :  and 
tis  plain,  by  his  own  words,  that  this  cause  was  depending  in 

court  before  my  time.  And  I  believe,  were  the  records  of 
the  court  here,  Mr.  Lewis  would  not  be  found  so  great  an 
offender  as  Mr. Thorn  would  make  him.  This  I  am  sure  of, 
both  the  High-Commission  and  myself  have  been  quick 
enough  against  all  ministers  which  have  been  proved  to  be 
debauched  in  their  life  and  conversation.  And  he  says 
nothing  against  me,  but  '  that  I  sided  with  his  adversaries ;' 
which  is  easy  to  say  against  any  judge  that  delivers  his 
sentence  against  any  man.  But  neither  of  these  come  home 
to  Hunsford. 

VIII.  The  next  charge  is  in  the  case  of  one  Mr.  Tomkins,  about 
the  taxing  of  a  minister  in  a  case  of  robbery,  and  repayment 
by  the  country  2. 

To  this  Mr.  Newdigate  is  produced ;  who  says,  as  he  re 
members,  that  I  should  speak  these  words,  (  That  ministers 
were  free  from  such  taxes,  and  I  hoped  to  see  the  times  in 
which  they  might  be  free  again/  First,  this  gentleman  is 
single.  Secondly3,  he  speaks  not  positively,  but  'as  he 

1  ['and  that  though  I  disliked  it,'  in  margin.] 

2  ['by  the  country.'  in  margin.]  3  ['Secondly/  in  margin.] 


remembers/     Thirdly,  this  tax  I  do  humbly  con(147)ceive  Die 
is  not  by  law  to  be  laid  upon  any  minister.     For  no  man  is    ePtimo- 
subject  to  this  tax,  but  they  which  are  to  keep  watch  and 
ward;  which  ministers  in  that  kind  are  not   bound  unto. 
And  this  I  learned  of  the  Ld.  Keep.  Coventry  °  at  the  Council- 
table.     So  I  might  well  then  hope  to  see  ministers  free  from 
all  such  taxes,  by  the  right  understanding  and  due  execution 
of  our  own  laws,  without  assuming  any  papal  power. 

The  last  instance  of  this  day  was  the  bringing  Sir  Rich.  IX. 
291  Samuel h  into  the  High-Commission,  for  doing  his  office  as 
justice  of  the  peace  upon  some  clergymen.  First,  for  this, 
this  gentleman  is  single,  and  in  his  own  case.  Secondly, 
himself  confesses,  that  '  his  bringing  into  the  High-Commis 
sion  was  long  after  the  fact/  Therefore  in  all  probability 
not  for  that :  nor  doth  he  say  that  I  caused  his  bringing  in. 
He  says  further,  'that  one  article  for  which  he  was  called 
into  the  Commission,  was,  that  he  was  an  enemy  to  the 
clergy/  But  he  doth  not  say,  that  I  preferred  these  articles 
against  him ;  nor  doth  he  tell,  or  can  I  remember,  what  the 
other  articles  were,  which  with  this  may  be  bad  enough  to 
merit  what  was  there  laid  against  him  :  and  whatsoever  was 
done,  appears  by  his  own  narration  to  be  the  act  of  the 
High-Commission,  or  the  Council-table,  and  so  not  chargeable 
upon  me  alone.  And  whereas  he  says,  '  I  blamed  him '  much 
at  the  Council-table :  let  him  tell  why,  and  then  I'll  give 
him  a  further  answer :  and  sure  if  I  did  blame  him,  I  had 
just  cause  so  to  do.  Lastly,  he  says,  '  I  did  use  the  word 
base  to  him  when  he  came  to  me/  Sure  I  cannot  believe 
I  did :  it  was  not  my  language  to  meaner  men.  If  it  did 
slip  from  me,  it  was  in  relation  to  his  enmity  to  the  clergy, 
not  to  his  person  or  quality.  "  And  I  conceive  'tis  no  gentle 
part,  for  a  man  of  place  and  power  in  his  country,  to  oppress 
poor  clergymen  which  neighbour  about  him.  In  which  kind 
this  gentleman  pessime  audiebat,  heard  extremely  ill." 

£    [Thomas    Coventry,    appointed  vol.  i.  p.  80.] 

Lord   Keeper,    Nov.  1,  1625 ;    Baron  h    [This   was   probably    Sir   Rich. 

Coventry,   April    10,    1628.     See   his  Samwell,  of  Upton  and  Gayton,  in  the 

character  in  Clarendon,  Hist.  Rebell.  county  of  Northampton.] 



CAP.  XXX.  292 

THIS  day  thus  ended,  I  was  ordered  to  appear  again  on 
April  22.    Monday,  April  22.     I  came,  and  my  former  answers  having 
taken  off  the  edge  of  many  men,  (for  so  I  was  told  by  good 
hands,)  the  scorns  put  upon  me  at  my  landing  and  elsewhere 
were  somewhat  abated,  though  when  it  was  at  best  I  suffered 
enough.     After  I  had  attended  the  pleasure  of  the  House 
some  hours,  I  was  remitted  without  hearing,  and  commanded 
April  25.    to  attend  again  upon  Thursday,  April  25.     But   sent  back 
April  30.    again  then  also,  and  ordered  to  appear  on  Tuesday,  April  30. 
And  when  I  came,  I  was  sent  away  once  more  unheard :  no 
consideration  had  of  myself,  or  the  great  charge  which  this 
frequent  coming  put  me  to.     I  was  then  ordered  to  appeal- 
again  on  Saturday,  May  4.     Then  I  was  heard  again ;  and 
the  day  proceeded  as  follows. 



Maii  4, 



To  raise  up  envy  against  me,  Mr.  Nicolas  falls  first  to 
repeating  the  titles  which  were  given  me  in  letters  from 
Oxford ;  to  which  I  gave  answer  the  day  before.  From 
thence  he  fell  again  upon  the  former  charge,  e  My  endeavour 
to  exempt  the  clergy  from  the  civil  power/  And  very  loud 
he  was,  and  full  of  sour  language  upon  me.  To  this  general 
I  answered  with  another  more  true;  that  I  never  did  attempt 
to  bring  the  temporal  power  under  the  clergy,  nor  to  free  the 
clergy  from  being  under  it :  but  I  do  freely  confess,  I  did 
labour  all  I  could  to  preserve  poor  clergymen  from  some 
laymen's  oppression,  which  lay  heavy  on  them.  And  de  vi 
laica  hath  been  an  old,  and  a  great,  and  too  just  a  complaint. 
And  this  I  took  to  be  my  duty,  doing  it  without  wrong  to 
any  man ;  as  sincerely  I  did  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge. 
And  1  assuring  myself,  that  God  did  not  raise  me  to  that 
place  of  eminency  to  sit  still,  see  His  service  neglected,  and 
His  ministers  discountenanced ;  nay,  sometimes  little  better 
than  trampled  on.  "  And  my  standing  thus  to  the  clergy, 
1  ['doing  it  ...  And  '  in  margin.] 

Ob1   ARCHBISHOP   LAUD.  169 

and  their  just  grievances,  is  not  the  least  cause  of  my  present  Die 
condition.  In  which  my  case  (though  not  my  abilities)  is 
somewhat  like  Cicero's.  For  having  now  for  many  years 
defended  the  public  state  of  the  Church,  and  the  private  of 
many  (148)  churchmen ;  as  he  had  done  many  citizens ; 
when  he  by  prevailing  factions  came  into  danger  himself, 
ejus  salutem  defendit  nemo  a,  no  man  took  care  to  defend  him 
that  had  defended  so  many ;  which  yet  I  speak  not  to  impute 
anything  to  men  of  my  own  calling,  who,  I  presume,  would 
have  lent  me  their  j  ust  defence,  to  their  power ;  had  not  the 
same  storm  which  drove  against  my  life,  driven  them  into 
corners  to  preserve  themselves." 

293  The  first  instance  was  in  Mr.  Shervil's  caseb;  in  which  Mr.  I. 
John  Steeveris  tells  what  I  said  to  the  counsel  pleading  in 
the  Star-Chamber,  which  was,  that  they  should  take  care 
fnot  to  cause  the  laws  of  the  Church  and  the  kingdom  to 
clash  one  against  another/  I  see,  my  Lords,  nothing  that  I 
spake  was  let  fall,  nor  can  I  remember  every  speech  that 
passed  from  me ;  he  may  be  happy  that  can.  But  if  I  did 
speak  these  words,  I  know  no  crime  in  them :  it  was  a  good 
caveat  to  the  counsel,  for  aught  I  know.  For  surely  the  laws 
of  Church  and  State  in  England  would  agree  well  enough 
together,  if  some  did  not  set  them  at  odds.  And  if  I  did 
further  say  to  the  then  Ld.  Keeper,  (as  'tis  charged,)  '  that 
some  clergymen  had  sat  as  high  as  he,  and  might  again  ;} 
which  I  do  not  believe  I  said  ;  yet  if  I  did,  'tis  a  known 
truth :  for  the  Ld.  Coventry,  then  Ld.  Keeper,  did  imme 
diately  succeed  the  Ld.  Bp.  of  Lincoln  in  that  office.  But 
though  I  dare  say  I  said  not  thus  to  the  Ld.  Keeper,  whose 
moderation  gave  me  no  cause  to  be  so  round  with  him, 
yet  to  the  counsel  at  bar,  I  remember  well,  upon  just  oc 
casion  given,  that  I  spake  to  this  effect ;  That  they  would 
forbear  too  much  depressing  of  the  clergy,  either  in  their 
reputation  or  maintenance  ;  in  regard  it  was  not  impossible 
that  their  profession,  now  as  high  as  ours  once  was,  may  fall 
to  be  as  low  as  ours  now  is  ;  "  if  the  professors  set  themselves 

a  [Veil.]  Patcrc.  lib.  ii.  Hist.  [cap.  See  State  Trials,  vol.  i.  pp.  374—396. 

66.]  Lond.  1730.  The  words  which  the 

b  [This  was  the  case  of  Henry  Slier-  Archbishop  admitted  that  he  used, 

field,  for  breaking  the  painted  window  will  be  found  in  his  speech,  juxta  fin. 

in  S.  Edmund's  Church,  Salisbury.  See  Work?,  vol.  vi.] 


Octavo  against  the  Church,  as  some  of  late  are  known  to  have  done  : 
and  that  the  sinking  of  the  Church  would  be  found  the  ready 
way  to  it1." 

II.  The  second  instance  was  about  calling  some  justices  of  the 
peace  into  the  High-Commission,  about  a  sessions  kept  at 

1.  The  first  witness  for  this  (for  three  were  produced)  was 
Mr.  John  Steevens.  He  says,  (  that  the  aisle  where  the 
sessions  were  kept  was  joined  to  the  church/  If  it  were  not 
now  a  part  of  the  church,  yet  doubtless,  being  within  the 
churchyard,  it  was  consecrated  ground.  He  says,  (  that 
sessions  were  kept  there  heretofore/  And  I  say,  the  more 
often  the  worse.  He  says,  '  that  I  procured  the  calling  of  them 
into  the  High-Commission/  But  he  proves  no  one  of  these 
things,  but  by  the  report  of  Sir  Rob.  Cook,  of  Gloucester 
shire,  a  party  in  this  cause.  He  says  again,  that  '  they  had 
the  Bp/s  licence  to  keep  sessions  there/  But  the  proof  of 
this  also  is  no  more  than  that  Sir  Rob.  Cook  told  him  so  :  so 
all  this  hitherto  is  hearsay.  Then  he  says,  '  the  88.  Canon 
of  the  Church  of  England  was  urged  in  the  Commission 
Court,  which  seems  to  give  leave  in  the  close  of  the  canon, 
that  temporal  courts  or  leets  may  be  kept  in  church  or 
churchyard0/  First,  that  clause  in  the  end  of  the  canon  is 
referred  to  the  ringing  of  bells,  not  to  the  profanations  men 
tioned  in  the  former  part  of  that  canon.  Nor  is  it  probable 
the  minister  and  churchwardens  should  have  power  to  give 
such  leave,  when  no  canon  gives  such  power  to  the  bishop 
himself.  And  were  it  so,  here's  no  proof  offered,  that  the 
minister  and  churchwardens  did  give  leave  :  and  suppose 
some  temporal  courts  might  upon  urgent  occasion  be  kept  in 
the  church  with  leave,  yet  that  is  no  warrant  for  sessions, 
where  there  may  be  trial  for  blood.  He  says  further,  '  that 
the  civilians  quoted  an  old  canon  of  the  Pope's,  and  that  that 
prevailed  against  the  canon  of  our  Church,  and  sentence 
given  against  them/  All  those  canons  which  the  civilians 
urged  are  law  in  England  d,  where  nothing  is  contrary  to  the  294 
1  ['and  that  .  .  .  it.'  on  opposite  page.] 

c  Can.  88,  Eccl.  Ang.  be  in  force  which  avc  not  contrary  to 

d  25  Hen.  VIII.  c.  19,  §  ult.    [This      the  laws  of  the  realm.] 
clause  provides  that  all  canons  shall 


law  of  God,  or  the  law  of  the  land,  or  the  King's  prerogative  Die 
royal l :  and  to  keep  off  profanation  from  churches  is  none  of  Octam 
these.     Besides,  were  all  this  true  which  is  urged,  the  act 
was  the  High-Commission's,  not  mine.     Nor  is  there  any 
thing  in  it  that  looks  toward  treason. 

2.  The  second  witness  is  Mr.  Edward  Steevens.     He  con 
fesses  that  the  sentence  was  given  by  the  High-Commission, 
and  that  I  had  but  my  single  (149)  vote  in  it.     And  for  the 
place  itself,  he  says,  '  the  place  where  the  sessions  were  kept 
was  separated  from  the  aisle  of  the  church  by  a  wall  breast- 
high/  which  is  an  evident  proof  that  it  was  formerly  a  part 
of  that  church,  and  continued  yet  under  the  same  roof. 

3.  The  third  witness  is  Mr.  Talboyes  (who,  it  seems,  will 
not  be  out  of  anything  which  may  seem  to  hurt  mee).     He 
says,  '  the  parish  held  it  no  part  of  the  church.'     Why  are 
not  some  of  them  examined,  but  this  man's  report  from  them 
admitted  ?     '  They  thought  no  harm,'  he   says,  '  and  got  a 
licence.'     But  why  did  they  get  a  licence,  if  their  own  con 
science  did  not  prompt  them  that  something  was  irregular  in 
that  business  ?     He  says,  '  he  was  informed  the  sessions  had 
been  twice  kept  there  before/     And  I  say,  under  your  Lps.' 
favour,  the  oftener  the  worse.     But  why  is  not  his  informer 
produced,  that  there  might  be  proof,  and  not  hearsay  ?  Upon 
this,  I  said,  (so  he  concludes,)  '  that  I  would  make  a  precedent 
against  keeping  it  any  more/     If  I   did  say  so,  the  cause 
deserved  it  •  men  in  this  age  growing  so  bold  with  churches, 
as  if  profanation  of  them  were  no  fault  at  all. 

The  third  instance  concerned  Sir  Tho.  Dacres,  a  justice  of  HI. 
peace  in  Middlesex,  and  his  warrant  for  punishing  some 
disorderly  drinking.  The  witnesses  the  two  churchwardens, 
Colliar  and  Wilson ;  two  plain  men,  but  of  great  memories : 
for  this  business  was  when  I  was  Bishop  of  London  ;  and  yet 
they  agree  in  every  circumstance,  in  every  word,  though  so 
many  years  since.  Well,  what  say  they  ?  It  seems  Dr.  Duck f, 
then  my  chancellor,  '  had  cited  these  churchwardens  into  my 
court/  Therefore  either  there  was,  or  at  least  to  his  judg 
ment  there  seemed  to  be,  somewhat  done  in  that  business 
against  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Church.  They  say  then,  'that 

1  ['or  the  King's  prerogative  royal :'  on  opposite  page.] 
e  [See  above,  pp.  77, 100.]        f  [Dr.  Arthur  Duck,  mentioned  vol.  iii.  p.  450.] 


Die  the  court  ended,  Dr.  Duck  brought  them  to  me/     And  what 

then  ?  Here  is  a  cause,  by  their  own  confession,  depending 
in  the  ecclesiastical  court ;  Dr.  Duck  in  the  King's  quarters, 
where  I  cannot  fetch  him  to  testify ;  no  means  left  me  to 
know  what  the  proceedings  were ;  and  I  have  good  cause  to 
think,  that  were  all  the  merits  of  the  cause  open  before  your 
Lps.,  you  would  say,  Sir  Tho.  Dacres  did  not  all  according  to 
law.  But  what  is  the  heart  of  this  charge  ?  It  is,  say  they, 
'  that  I  commanded  Dr.  Duck  to  prosecute  them/  And  what 
fault  was  in  this  ?  For  if  it  were  just,  why  should  not  Dr. 
Duck  go  on  with  his  prosecution  ?  If  Dr.  Duck  and  I  were 
both  mistaken  in  the  particular,  'twas  easy  getting  a  prohibi 
tion.  Yea,  but  they  say  I  said,  '  If  this  must  be  so,  Sir  Thorn. 
Dacres  shall  be  Bishop  of  London,  and  I'll  be  Sir  Tho. 
Dacres/  For  aught  I  see  in  the  weight  of  it,  this  whole 
charge  was  but  to  bring  in  this  speech.  And  truly,  my  Lds., 
my  old  decayed  memory  is  not  such,  as  that  I  can  recal  a 
speech,  thirteen  or  fourteen  years  since.  But  if  I  did  say  it, 
I  presume  'tis  not  high  treason  for  a  Bishop  of  London  to  295 
say  so  much  of  Sir  Tho.  Dacres.  "Mr.  Browne,  in  the 
summing  up  the  charge  against  me,  laid  the  weight  of  the 
charge  in  this,  '  that  these  churchwardens  were  prosecuted  for 
executing  the  warrant  of  a  justice  of  peace  upon  an  ale-house 
keeper,  for  tippling  on  the  Sabbath-day,  contrary  to  the 
statutes  Jacobi  7  and  Caro.  3.'  To  which  I  answered,  That 
those  statutes  did  concern  the  ale-house  keepers  only ;  nor 
were  the  churchwardens  called  in  question  for  that ;  but 
because,  being  church-officers,  and  a  churchman  tippling 
there,  they  did  not  complain  of  that  to  the  chancellor  of  the 
diocese.  Mr.  Browne  replied,  '  there  was  no  clergyman  there.' 
I  am  glad  I  was  so  mistaken.  But  that  excuseth  not  the 
churchwardens,  who,  being  church-officers,  should  have  been 
as  ready  to  inform  the  bishop,  as  to  obey  the  justice  of 
peace  V 

IV.  The  fourth  instance  was  about  marriages  in  the  Tower, 
which  I  opposed  against  law.  The  witness  Sir  William  Bal- 
fore,  then  Lieutenant  of  the  Tower.  He  says,  that  '  I  did 
oppose  those  marriages.'  And  so  say  I.  But  I  did  it  for  the 
subject  of  England's  sake.  For  many  of  their  sons  and 
1  ['  Mr.  Browne,  .  .  peace.'  on  opposite  page.] 


daughters  were  there  undone.  Nor  banns,  nor  licence,,  nor  Die 
any  means  of  foreknowledge  to  prevent  it.  Was  this  ill  ?  Octavo- 
He  says,  '  that  when  he  spake  with  me  about  it,  I  desired 
him  to  speak  with  his  Majesty  about  it,  because  it  was  the 
King's  house/  What  could  I  do  with  more  moderation? 
He  confesses  he  did  so,  and  that  he  moved  the  King  'that 
the  cause  might  be  heard  at  the  Council-table,  not  at  the 
High-Commission :'  to  this  his  Majesty  inclined,  and  I 
opposed  nothing;  so  the  general  abuse  might  be  rectified. 
Then  he  says,  Mr.  Attorney  Noye  '  said  at  the  Council-table, 
it  was  the  King's  free-chapel,  and  that  no  Pope  in  those 
times  offered  to  inhibit  there/  First,  if  Mr.  Attorney  did  so 
say,  he  must  have  (150)  leave  to  speak  freely  in  the  King's 
cause.  Secondly,  (as  I  humbly  conceive,)  the  chapel  for 
ordinary  use  of  prisoners  and  inhabitants  of  the  Tower,  where 
these  disorderly  marriages  are  made,  is  not  that  which  is 
called  the  King's  free-chapel ;  but  another  in  the  side  of  the 
White  Tower  by  the  King's  lodgings.  Thirdly,  if  it  be,  yet  I 
have  herein  not  offended,  for  I  did  all  that  was  done  by  the 
King's  leave,  not  by  any  assumption  of  papal  power.  Then 
he  tells  the  Lords,  '  that  in  a  discourse  of  mine  writh  him  at 
Greenwich,  about  this  business,  I  let  fall  an  oath.'  I  am 
sorry  for  it,  if  I  did.  But  that's  no  treason.  "  And  I  know 
whom  the  deponent  thinks  to  please  by  this  interposition. 
For  to  the  matter  it  belongs  not."  In  conclusion,  he  says 
truly,  f  that  the  King  committed  the  business  to  some  lords 
and  judges,  that  so  an  end  might  be  put  to  it :  and  in  the 
meantime  ordered,  that,  till  it  were  ended,  there  should  be  no 
more  marriages  in  the  Tower.'  How  this  business  ended,  I 
know  not.  It  began,  I  am  sure,  by  authority  of  his  Majesty's 
grant  of  the  High-Commission,  to  question  and  punish  all 
such  abuses,  tarn  in  locis  exemptis,  quam  non  exemptis  s.  And 
his  Majesty  having  graciously  taken  this  care  for  the  indem 
nity  of  the  subject,  I  troubled  myself  no  more  with  it :  my 
aim  being  not  to  cut  off  any  privileges  of  that  place,  but  only 
to  prevent  the  abuses  of  that  lawless  custom.  "  Arid  if  cui 
bono  be  a  considerable  circumstance,  as  it  uses  to  be  in  all 
such  businesses,  then  it  may  be  thought  on  too,  that  this 
296  gentleman,  the  lieutenant,  had  a  considerable  share  for  his 

*  [See  Rymer,  Foedera,  VIIT.  iv.  39.] 


Die  part  out  of  the  fee  for  every  marriage.     Which  I  believe  was 

Octavo.       ag  ^ear  to  nim  as  tjie  privilege." 

V.  The  next  instance  is  broke  out  of  the  Tower,  and  got  as  far 
as  Oxford.  The  witness  Alderman  Nixon.  He  says,  '  the 
mayor  and  the  watch  set  by  him  were  disturbed  by  the 
Proctors  of  the  University,  and  a  constable  imprisoned11/  The 
night-walk,  and  the  keeping  of  the  watch,  is  the  ancient, 
known,  and  constant  privilege  of  the  University1,  for  some 
hundred  of  years ;  and  so  the  watch  set  by  the  town  ^(pur 
posely  to  pick  a  quarrel)  was  not  according  to  law.  He  adds, 
'  that  when  the  Right  Honourable  the  E.  of  Barkshire1  would 
have  referred  the  business  to  the  King's  counsel  learned,  I 
refused,  and  said  I  would  maintain  it  by  my  own  power,  as 
Chancellor.'  If  I  did  say  this  (which  I  neither  remember  nor 
believe),  I  might  better  refuse  lawyers,  (riot  the  law,  but 
lawyers,)  than  they  a  sworn  judge  of  their  own  nomination, 
which  they  did. 

The  case  was  briefly  this.  There  were  some  five  or  six 
particulars  which  had,  for  divers  years,  bred  much  trouble 
and  disagreement  between  the  University  and  the  city ;  of 
which  (to  my  best  remembrance)  this  about  the  night-watch, 
and  another  about  felons'  goods,  were  two  of  the  chief.  The 
University  complained  to  me.  I  was  so  far  from  going  any 
by-way,  that  I  was  resolved  upon  a  trial  at  Westminster- 
Hall,  thinking  (as  I  after  found)  that  nothing  but  a  legal 
trial  would  set  those  two  bodies  at  quiet.  The  townsmen 
liked  not  this.  Came  some  of  the  chief  of  them  to  London  : 
prevailed  with  their  honourable  steward,  my  Ld.  the  E.  of 
Barkshire2,  to  come  to  me  to  Lambeth,  and  by  his  Lp.  offered 
to  have  all  ended  without  so  great  charge  at  law,  by  reference 
to  any  of  the  judges.  I  said  I  had  no  mind  to  wrong  the 
town,  or  put  them  to  charge,  but  thought  they  would  fly  off 
from  all  awards,  and  therefore  stuck  to  have  a  legal  trial. 
After  this,  some  of  the  chief  aldermen  came  to  me  with  my 
lord,  and  offered  me,  that  if  the  University  would  do  the 
like,  they  would  go  down  and  bring  it  up  under  the  mayor 

1  ['  of  the  University,'  in  margin.] 

2  ['  my  Ld.  the  E.  of  Barkshire,'  in  margin.] 

h  [See  an  account  of  this  dispute  in  pp.  274 — 280.] 

Wood's  Annals,  pp.  421,  422.     It  is  *   [Thomas  Howard,  created  Earl  of 

also  referred  to  by  the  Archbishop  in  Berkshire,  Feb.  6.  " 
Hist,  of  Chancellorship,  Works,  vol.  v. 


and  aldermen's  hands,  that  they  would  stand  to  such  end  as  Die 
Judge  Jones,  who  rode  that  circuit,  should  upon  hearing 
make. '  They  did  so :  and  brought  the  paper  so  subscribed 
(and  therefore  I  think  Alderman  Nixon's  hand  is  to  it  as  well 
as  the  rest k).  Upon  this  I  gave  way ;  the  University  accepted ; 
the  judge  heard  and  settled.  And  now  when  they  saw  my 
troubles  threatening  me,  they  brake  all,  whistled  up  their 
recorder1  to  come  and  complain  at  the  Council-table,  his 
Majesty  (151)  present01.  And  I  remember  well,  I  told  his 
Lp.  (then  making  the  aforesaid  motion  to  refer  to  the  King's 
learned  counsel),  that  his  Lp.  well  knew  what  had  passed, 
and  that  being  so  used  as  I  had  been  by  the  townsmen, 
I  would  trouble  myself  with  no  more  references  to  lawyers* 
or  to  that  effect.  And  I  appeal  to  the  honour  of  my  lord, 
whether  this  be  not  a  true  relation. 

The  sixth  instance  concerns x  the  putting  of  one  Mr.  VI. 
Grant  out  of  his  right.  He  says,  (but  he  is  single  and  in  his 
own  cause,)  '  that  Mr.  Bridges  was  presented  to  an  impropria- 
tion,  and  that  suing  for  tithe,  he  (the  said  Grant)  got  a 
prohibition,  and  Mr.  Bridges  a  reference  to  the  then  Ld. 
Keeper  Coventry  and  myself ;  that  we  referred  them  to  the 
297  law,  and  that  there  Grant  was  nonsuited,  and  so  outed 
of  his  right.'  First,  in  all  this  there's  nothing  said  to  be 
done  by  me  alone.  Secondly,  the  Ld.  Keeper,  who  well 
understood  the  law,  thought  it  fittest  to  refer  them  to  the 
law;  and  so  we  did.  If  he  were  there  nonsuited  first,  and 
outed  after,  it  was  the  law  that  put  him  out,  not  we.  "  Yet 
your  Lps.  see  here  was  a  prohibition  granted  in  a  case  which 
the  law  itself  after  rejected." 

Then  follows  the  instance,  that  I  had  a  purpose  to  abolish  all  VIL 
impropriations.     1.  The  first  proof  alleged,  was  a  passage  out 
of  Bishop  Mountague's  book,  p.  210  n,  that  '  tithes  were  due 

1  [The  passage  was  originally  written,  'the  putting  of  one  Mr.  Bridges  out 
of  his  vicarage.  'Tis  said  by  Mr.  Grant,  the  single  witness  in  this  cause,  and, 
as  I  remember,  patron,  that  Mr.  Bridges  as  vicar  sued  for  tithes.'  Where  the 
name  '  Bridges'  is  printed,  the  name  '  Grant'  was  erased  and  '  Bridges'  written 
above.  The  words  'and  .  .  .  patron'  are  in  margin.] 

k   [See  Articles   of  agreement  be-          m  [See  the  order  in  Council,  Hist, 

tween  the  Univ.  and  City  of  Oxford,  of  Chancellorship,  Works,  vol.  v.  pp. 

Hist,  of  Chancellorship,  Works,  vol.v.  283,  284.] 

pp.  123,  124.     Nixon's  name  is  not         n  [Diatribe  upon  the  First  Part  of 

signed  to  them.]  the  late  History  of  Tithes.  By  Richard 

1    [Mr.  Whistler.]  Mountagu.     Lond.  1621.] 


Die  by  Divine  right,  and  then  no  impropriations  might  stand  V 

And  Mr.  Pryn  witnessed  very  carefully  :  '  That  this  book  was 
found  in  my  own  study,  and  given  me  by  Bp.  Mountague.' 
And  what  of  this  ?  Doth  any  bishop  print  a  book,  and  not 
give  the  archbishop  one  of  them?  Or  must  I  answer  for 
every  proposition  that  is  in  every  book  that  is  in  my  study  ? 
or  that  any  author  gives  me  ?  And  if  Bishop  Mountague  be 
of  opinion  that  tithes  are  due  by  divine  right,  what  is  that  to 
me?  Your  Lps.  know,  many  men  are  of  different  opinions 
in  that  difficulty,  and  I  am  confident  you  will  not  determine 
the  controversy  by  an  Act  of  Parliament.  They  were  nibbling 
at  my  Diary  in  this,  to  show  '  that  it  was  one  of  my  projects 
to  fetch  in  impropriations /  but  it  was  not  fit  for  their  pur 
pose  :  for  'tis  expressed,  *  that  if  I  lived  to  see  the  repair  of 
St.  Paul's  near  an  end,  I  would  move  his  Majesty  for  the  like 
grant  for  the  buying  in  of  impropriations  V  And  to  buy  them 
from  the  owners,  is  neither  against  law,  nor  against  anything 
else  that  is  good ;  nor  is  it  any  usurpation  of  papal  power. 

2.  The  second  proof,  was  my  procuring  from  the  King 
such  impropriations  in  Ireland,  as  were  in  the  King's  power, 
to  the  Church  of  Ireland.  "  Which  Mr.  Nicolas  (in  his 
gentle  language)  calls  robbing  of  the  Crown."  My  Lords,  the 
case  was  this  : — The  Ld.  Primate  of  Armagh  P  writ  unto  me, 
how  ill  conditioned  the  state  of  that  Church  was  for  want  of 
means,  and  besought  me  that  I  would  move  his  Majesty  to 
give  the  impropriations  there,  which  yet  remained  in  the 
Crown,  for  the  maintenance  and  encouragement  of  able 
ministers  to  live  among  the  people,  and  instruct  them  : 
assuring  me,  they  were  daily  one  by  one  begged  away  by 
private  men,  to  the  great  prejudice  both  of  Crown  and 
Church.  And  the  truth  of  this,  the  Ld.  Primate  is  now  in 
this  kingdom,  and  will  witness.  I  acquainted  the  King's 
great  officers,  the  Ld.  Treasurer  1  and  the  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer r,  with  it.  And  after  long  deliberation,  the  King 
was  pleased,  at  my  humble  suit,  to  grant  them  in  the  way 
1  ['might  stand.'  in  margin.] 

0  Diary,  in  fine,nu.'21.  [22.  Yol.  iii.  proper  place  in  Dec.  1633.] 
p.  255.]  i  [Richard    Weston,    first     Baron 

P  [See  Abp.  Ussher's  letter,   num-  Weston,  afterwards  Earl  of  Portland.] 
bored  clxxii.  in  Parr's  Collection,  and          r   [Sir  F.   (afterwards   Lord)    Cot- 

by  him   erroneously  placed  in  1632.  tington.] 
It  is  restored  by  Dr.  Elrington  to  its 


which  I  proposed.  Which  was,  that  when  they  came  into  Die 
the  Clergy's  hands,  they  should  pay  all  the  rents  respectively  Octavo- 
to  the  King  ;  and  some  consideration  for  the  several  renew- 
ings.  And  the  truth  of  this  appears  in  the  deeds  s.  So  here 
was  no  robbing  of  the  Crown.  For  the  King  had  all  his  set 
rents  reserved  to  a  penny,  and  consideration  for  his  casualties 
beside.  And,  my  Lords,  the  increase  of  Popery  is  complained 
of  in  Ireland.  Is  there  a  better  way  to  hinder  this  growth, 
than  to  place  an  able  Clergy  among  the  inhabitants  ? 
(152)  Can  an  able  Clergy  be  had  without  means  ?  Is  any 
298  means  fitter  than  impropriations  restored  ?  My  Lords,  I  did 
this,  as  holding  it  the  best  means  to  keep  down  Popery,  and 
to  advance  the  Protestant  religion.  And  I  wish  with  all  my 
heart,  I  had  been  able  to  do  it  sooner,  before  so  many  impro 
priations  were  gotten  from  the  Crown  into  private  hands  *. 

Next  I  was  charged  with  another  project  in  my  Diary  u,  VIII. 
which  was  to  settle  some  fixed  commendams  upon  all  the 
smaller  bishoprics.  For  this,  I  said  their  own  means  were 
too  small  to  live  and  keep  any  hospitality,  little  exceeding 
four  or  five  hundred  pound  a  year.  I  considered  that  the 
commendams  taken  at  large  and  far  distant,  caused  a  great 
dislike  and  murmur  among  many  men.  That  they  were  in 
some  cases  materia  odiosa,  and  justly  complained  of.  And 
hereupon  I  thought  it  a  good  Church-work,  to  settle  some 
temporal  lease,  or  some  benefice  sine  cura,  upon  the  lesser 
bishoprics  ;  but  nothing  but  such  as  was  in  their  own  right 
and  patronage  :  that  so  no  other  man's  patronage  might 
receive  prejudice  by  the  bishop's  commendam  :  which  was 
not  the  least  rock  of  offence,  against  which  commendams 
endangered  themselves.  And  that  this  was  my  intent  and 
endeavour,  is  expressed  in  my  Diary  :  and  I  cannot  be  sorry 
for  it. 

Then  I  was  accused  for  setting  old  popish  canons  above    IX. 
the  laws.     Mr.  Burton  is  the  sole  witness.     He  says,  '  it  was 
in  a  case  about  a  pew,   in  which  those  canons  did  weigh 
down  an  Act  of  Parliament.'     a  I  did  never  .think  till  now 

8  [The  King's  order  to  the  Lords  *  [As,  e.  g.  by  Sir  John  Bathe,  whose 

Justices  of  Ireland,  respecting  these  case  is  mentioned  in  Laud's  letter  to 

impropriations,    is   given   by  Collier  Ussher,  July  5,  1630.] 

'    (Eccl.  Hist.  vol.  ii.  p.  749),  from  the  u  Diary,  in  fine.  nu.  8.  [leg.  9,  vol. 

original  in  the  Paper  Office.]  iii.  p.  254.] 

LAUD.  —  VOL.  iv. 


Die  Mr.  Burton  would  have  made  any  canons  pew -fellows  with  an 

Octavo.  ^ct  Qf  parijament."  But  seriously,  should  not  Mr.  Burton's 
testimony  for  this  have  been  produced  at  the  second  instance 
of  this  day  x  ?  For  in  the  end  of  that  is  just  such  another 
charge;  and  the  answer  there  given  will  satisfy  this,  and 
that  by  Act  of  Parliament  too  y. 

X.  After  this  came  a  charge  with  a  great  outcry,  that  since 
my  coming  to  be  Archbishop  I  had  renewed  the  High-Com 
mission,  and  put  in  many  illegal  and  exorbitant  clauses, 
which  were  not  in  the  former.  Both  the  commissions  were 
produced  z.  Upon  this  I  humbly  desired,  that  the  docket 
might  be  read ;  by  which  their  Lps.  might  see  all  those  par 
ticulars  which  were  added  in  the  new  commission,  and  so  be 
able  to  judge,  how  fit  or  unfit  they  were  to  be  added.  The 
docket  was  read.  And  there  was  no  particular  found,  but 
such  as  highly  deserved  punishment,  and  were  of  ecclesias 
tical  cognizance,  as  blasphemy,  schism,  and  two  or  three 
more  of  like  nature. 

1 .  In  this  charge,  the  first  exorbitant l  clause  they  insisted 
on,  as  added  to  the  new  commission,  was  the  '  power  given 
in   locis  exemptis,  et  non  exemptis,'  as  if  it  were  thereby 
intended  to  destroy  all  privileges.     No,  not  to  destroy  any 
privilege,  but  not  to  suffer  enormous  sins  to  have  any  privilege. 
Besides,  this  clause  hath  ever  been  in  all  commissions  that 
ever  were  granted.   And  I  then  showed  it  to  the  Lords  in  the 
old  commission  there  present,  pp.  28,  32,  35,  42.  "  Nay  more, 
this  proceeding,  tarn  in  locis  exemptis,  quam  non  exemptis,  is 
allowed  to  the  governors  of  the  Church,  in  the  exercise  of 
their  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction,  by  Act  of  Parliament  in  Queen 
Elizabeth's  time  a ;  which  would  never  have  been  allowed,  had  299 
it  then  been  thought  such  a  dangerous  business,  as  'tis  now 
made  against  me  *." 

2.  The  second  clause  was,  '  Power  to  censure  by  fine  and 
imprisonment/     This  also  I  showed  in  the  old  commission, 
fol.  37 3,  and  is,  as  I  conceive,  in  plain  pursuance  of  the  Act 

exorbitant '  in  margin.] 

'  Nay  more  .  .  against  me.'   on  opposite  page.] 
'  fol.  37,'  in  margin.] 

x  [P.  148.  of  orig.  MS.     See  above,  z  [The  two  Commissions  are  given 

p.  170.]  inPtymer,Foed.VII.  iv.  171— 181,  and 

y  25  Hen. VIII.  cap.  19,  §ult.   [See  VIIL  iv.  34-43.] 

above,  p.  170,  note  d.]  •  1  Eliz.  cap.  2.  [§  23.] 


of  Parliament  upon  which  the  High-Commission  is  grounded15.  Die 
For  the  King  says  there,  fol.  13,  (and  so  His  in  the  new,) 
that  he  grants  this  power,  hy  virtue  of  his  supreme  authority 
and  prerogative  royal,  f  and  of  the  said  Act c.'  Nay  further, 
His  added  in  this  latter  commission,  '  and  by  our  authority 
ecclesiastical/  which  is  not  expressed  in  the  former.  And 
sure  I  would  never  have  caused  '  authority  ecclesiastical '  to 
be  added,  had  I  any  plot  (as  His  urged)  either  to  exalt  the 
clergy  above  the  laity,  or  to  usurp  ' papal  power/  which  all 
men  know  is  far  enough  from  ascribing  ecclesiastical  autho 
rity  to  the  King.  And  as  for  fine  and  imprisonment ;  if  that 
power  be  not  according  to  law,  why  was  it  first  admitted,  and 
after  continued  in  all  former  commissions  l  ? 

3.  The  third  clause  was  the  non  obstante,  which  he  said 
was  '  against   (153)   all  law,  and  of  such  a  boundless  extent, 
as  was  never  found  in  commission  or  other  grant  in  England/ 
And  he  here  desired  the  Lords,  that  he  might  read  it 2,  which 
he  did,  with  great  assurance  of  a  triumph.     But  after  all  this 
noise,  which  Mr.  Nicolas  had  made,  I  showed  the  same  non 
obstante  in  the  old  commission,  fol.  62,  word  for  word,  which 
I  humbly  desired  might  be  read  and  compared :  it  was  so. 
The   Lords  looked  strangely  upon  it :  Mr.  Nicolas  was  so 
startled,  that  he  had  not  patience  to  stay  till  his  reply,  (which 
he  saw  impossible  to  be  made,)  but  interrupted  me,  and  had 
the  face  to  say  in  that  honourable  assembly,  that  I  need  not 
stand  upon  that,  for  he  did  but  name  that,  without  much 
regarding  it.    And  yet  at  the  giving  of  the  charge,  he  insisted 
principally  upon  that  clause,  and  in  higher  and  louder  terms 
than  are  before  expressed.     Had  such  an  advantage  been 
found  against  me,  I  should  have  been  accounted  extremely 
negligent,  if  I  compared  not  the  commissions  together;  or 
extremely  impudent,  if  I  did. 

4.  The  fourth  exception  was,    c  that  by  this  commission  I 
took  greater  power  than  ever  any  court  had,  because  both 
temporal  and  ecclesiastical/     First,   whatsoever  power  the 
High-Commission  had,  was  not  taken  by  them,  till  given  by 

1  ['  And  as  ...  commissions'?'  on  opposite  page.] 

2  ['that  he  might  read  it/  originally  Ho  read  it,'] 

b  1  Eliz.  cap.  1,  §  [1]8.  virtue  of  this  Act.' 

c  The  words  of  the  statute  are,  'by 

N  2 


Die  his    Majesty,  and    that  according   to  use  and   statute   (for 

Octavo.  allght  hath  been  yet  declared).  Secondly,  they  have  not 
power  of  life  or  limb,  therefore  not  so  great  power  as  other 
courts  have.  Thirdly,  they  may  have  more  various  power  in 
some  respects,  but  that  cannot  make  it  greater.  "  As  for  the 
expression  in  which  'tis  said,  '  I  took  this  power ;'  that  is  put 
most  unworthily,  and  unjustly  too,  to  derive  the  envy  as  much 
as  he  could  upon  my  person  only."  For  he  could  not  hold 
from  comparing  me  to  Pope  Boniface  VIII.  and  saying,  that 
'  I  took  on  me  the  power  of  both  swordsV  But  this  was  only 
ad  faciendum  populum.  For  he  knows  well  enough,  that  to 
take  both  the  swords,  as  the  Pope  takes  them,  is  to  challenge 
them  originally  as  due  to  him  and  his  place :  not  to  take 
both,  as  under  the  prince,  and  given  by  his  authority ;  and  300 
so,  not  I  alone,  but  all  the  commissioners  take  theirs. 

5.  Fifthly,  to  prove  that  this  vast  commission  (as  it  was 
called)  was  put  in  execution,  Mr.  Burton  is  produced.  He 
says,  that  '  when  he  was  called  into  the  High-Commission,  he 
appealed  to  the  King,  and  pleaded  his  appeal ;  and  that 
thereupon  I  and  the  Bp.  of  London  writ  to  the  King  to  have 
him  submit  to  the  court/  He  confesses  he  was  dismissed 
upon  his  appeal,  till  his  Majesty's  pleasure  was  further  known. 
And  it  was  our  duty,  considering  what  a  breach  this  would 
make  upon  the  jurisdiction  of  the  court,  to  inform  his 
Majesty  of  it ;  and  we  did  so.  The  King  declared,  that  he 
should  submit  to  the  court,  as  is  confessed  by  himself.  Then 
he  says,  c  because  he  would  not  submit  to  the  court,  he  was 
censured  notwithstanding  his  appeal/  And  he  well  deserved 
it,  that  would  not  be  ruled  by  his  Majesty,  to  whom  he  had 
appealed.  And  the  Commission  had  power  to  do  what  they 
did.  Besides,  himself  confesses,  all  this  was  done  by  the 
High- Commission,  not  by  me.  Nor  doth  he  urge  any  threat, 
promise,  or  solicitation  of  mine,  any  way  to  particularise  the 
act  upon  me  ;  and  further,  he  is  single,  and  in  his  own  cause. 
XI.  Then  followed  the  last  charge  of  this  day,  which  was  the 
patent  granted  for  the  fines  in  the  High-Commission  for 
finishing  the  west  end  of  St.  Paul's,  cried  out  upon  as  illegal, 
and  extorted  from  the  King,  and  such  as  took  all  power  from 

d  [See  Extrav.  Com.  lib.  i.  tit.  '  De      sanctam/  in  lib.  Extrav.  p.  208.  Corp. 
Majorit.    et  Obcd.'    cap.  1.     '  Unain      J"ur.  Can.  torn,  iii.] 


him  for  the  space  of  the  ten  years,  for  which  time  it  was  Die 
granted.  This  is  the  fourth  time  that  St.  Paul's  is  struck  at.  Octam 
My  Lords,  let  it  come  as  often  as  it  will,  my  project  and 
endeavour  in  that  work  was  honest  and  honourable,  to  both 
church  and  kingdom  of  England.  No  man  in  all  this  search 
and  pursuit  hath  been  able  to  charge  me  with  the  turning  of 
any  one  penny,  or  pennyworth,  to  other  use  than  was  limited 
to  me.  I  took  a  great  deal  of  care  and  pains  about  the  work, 
and  cannot  repent  of  anything  I  did  in  that  service,  but  of 
human  frailty.  And  whereas  'tis  said,  'this  patent  was 
extorted  from  his  Majesty;'  as  there  is  no  proof  offered 
for  it,  so  is  there  no  truth  in  it.  (154)  For  his  Majesty's 
piety  was  so  forward,  that  nothing  needed  to  be  extorted 
from  him.  Thus  went  I  on,  bona  fide,  and  took  the  prime 
direction  of  the  kingdom  for  drawing  the  patent ;  the  L. 
Keeper  Coventry6,  Mr.  Noyf,  and  Sir  Henr.  Martin z.  'And 
therefore  if  anything  be  found  against  law  in  it,  it  cannot  be 
imputed  to  me,  who  took  all  the  care  I  could  to  have  it 
beyond  exception.  And  I  marvel  what  security  any  man 
shall  have,  that  adventures  upon  any  great  and  public  work 
in  this  kingdom;  if  such  counsel  cannot  be  trusted  for 
drawing  up  of  his  warrant.  "  And  whereas  it  was  said,  '  this 
patent  for  the  ten  years'  space  took  away  both  justice  and 
mercy  from  the  King  :'  that's  nothing  so.  For  whatever  the 
words  be  to  enable  me  the  better  for  that  work,  yet  these 
being  inseparable  from  him,  may  be  used  by  him,  notwith 
standing  this  or  any  other  patent.  And  if  these  be  insepa 
rable  (as  'tis  granted  they  are) ,  no  inseparable  thing  can  be 
taken  away  ;  or  if  it  be  taken,  'tis  void  in  law,  and  the  King 
is  where  he  was  in  the  exercise  of  his  right,  both  for  justice 
and  mercy.  And  so  I  answered  Mr.  Brown's  summary 
301  charge  against  me ;  and  as  for  that  which  he  further  urged 
concerning  S.  Gregory's  church,  Mr.  Inigo  Jones  and  others 
were  trusted  with  that  whole  business,  and  were  censured  for 
it  in  this  present  Parliament h.  In  all  which  examination,  no 

1  [Originally,  '  And  the  Ld.  Keeper  was  so  careful  (to  his  honour  I  speak  it) 
that  he  would  needs  draw  the '  The  sentence  was  not  completed ;  the  words 
are  crossed  out.]  

e  [See  above,  p.  167,  note  &.]  h  [See  Nalson's  Collection,  vol.  i. 

f  [Attorney-General.]  pp.  728,729,  771.] 

s  [Judge  of  the  Prerogative  Court.] 


Die  part  of  the  charge  fell  on  me1/'     And  because  here  are  so 

many  things  urged  about  free-chapels,  lay-fees,  patents,  ap 
peals,  and  the  like,  I  humbly  desire  a  salvo  may  be  entered 
for  me,  and  that  my  counsel  may  be  heard  for  matter  of  law, 
if  any  doubt  stick  with  your  Lps. 

This  day  ended,  I  did,  according  to  my  resolution  for 
merly  taken,  move  the  Lords  for  means,  considering  my 
charge  in  coming,  and  how  oft  I  had  attended  and  was  not 
heard.  Their  Lps.  considered  of  my  motion,  and  sent  me 
out  word  I  should  petition  them.  I  did  humbly  petition  their 

Mali  6.  Lps.,  May  6.  My  petition  was  presently  sent  down  to  the 
House  of  Commons,  that  so  by  both  Houses  it  might  be 
recommended  to  the  Committee'  for  Sequestrations  *.  But 
upon  a  speech  in  the  House  of  Commons,  that  it  was  fit  to 
see  what  would  become  of  me,  before  they  troubled  them 
selves  with  thinking  of  means  for  me,  my  petition  was  cast 

1  ['  And  if  these  .  .  .  fell  on  me.'  on  opposite  page.] 

'  [The  following  is  the  entry  in  the  venue  of  his  archbishopric  having  been 

Lords'  Journals  : —  now   two  years  under  sequestration, 

"  Die  Mercurii,  8°  die  Mali. — Upon  his  goods  seized ;  therefore  desired 
reading  the  petition  of  William,  Arch-  that  some  fitting,  present,  timely  pro- 
bishop  of  Canterbury,  prisoner  in  the  portion  may  be  timely  (sic)  allotted 
Tower,  showing/  That  having  no  other  him,  for  his  present  maintenance  :' 
means  than  by  this  his  humble  peti-  "  Hereupon  this  House  ordered, 
tion  to  renew  his  most  humble  motion  That  this  petition  be  recommended  to 
made  to  your  Lordships  at  the  bar  the  House  of  Commons ;  and  desired 
for  some  support,  according  to  the  that  such  course  may  be  taken  for  his 
necessity  of  his  occasions  of  attending  relief  herein  as  is  usual  in  things  of 
before  your  Lordships,  the  whole  re-  this  nature."] 



AT  my  parting  from  the  House,  I  was  ordered  to  appear 
again  on  Thursday,  May  91.     But  then  fairly  put  off  by  an  Mali  9. 
order  (sent  to  the  Lieutenant  of  the  Tower)  to  Monday,  May 
13,  so  the  scorn  and  charge  of  that  day  was  scaped.     But  then  Mail  13. 
I  appeared  according  to  this  order,  and  had  scorn  plenty,  for 
what  I  escaped  the  day  before.     Arid,  after  long  attendance, 
was   dismissed  again  unheard,  and  had  Thursday,  May  16, 
assigned  unto  me.     That  day  held,  and  proceeded  thus. 


The  first  charge  of  this  day  was  about  a  reversion  of  the  I. 
town-clerk's  office  of  Shrewsbury2  to  one  Mr.  Lee,  which  he  Mail  16, 
desired  might  be  inserted  into  the  new  charter  3.  First,  Mr.  ~.  ' 
Lee  is  single  here,  and  in  his  own  case.  Secondly,  it  appears 
by  his  own  confession,  out  of  the  mouth  of  Mr.  Barnard,  that 
there  was  a  reference  of  this  business  to  those  Lords  to  whom 
Shrewsbury  charter  was  referred.  For  he  says,  that  Mr. 
Barnard  told  him  his  business  was  stayed,  and  he  thought 
by  me,  but  did  not  know  whether  the  Lord  Keeper's  hand 
were  not  in  it :  so  it  seems  by  himself,  this  was  done  by  the 
Lords  referees,  and  not  by  me.  Thirdly,  I  did  not  then 
think,  nor  do  now,  that  the  reversion  of  a  place  to  be  sold  for 
three  hundred  pound4,  (as  he  confesses  that  was,)  was  fit  to 
be  put  into  a  town  charter ;  but  yet  neither  I  nor  tlje  Ld. 
Keeper  did  anything  in  that  stop,  but  what  we  acquainted 
302  his  Majesty  with,  and  had  his  approbation  of.  And,  whereas 
he  says,  that  he  acquainted  the  Right  Honourable  the  E.  of 
Dorset a  with  (155)the  stay  that  was  made,  and  '  that  hereupon 
his  Lp.  should  say,  Have  we  two  kings  ?'  I  cannot  believe 

1  [There  originally  followed  here,  and  afterwards  erased,  'After  scorn  by  the 
way,  and  long  attendance  there,  I  was  sent  back  unheard.  And  command,  d  to 
be  there  again  on  Monday,  Mail  13.  Then  put  off  again  to  Thursday,  Mail  16; 
but  this  was '] 

of  Shrewsbury '  in  margin.]  3  [Originally, 'of  Shrewsbury.'] 

for  three  hundred  pound/  in  margin.] 

a  [Edward  Sackville,  fourth  Earl  of  Dorset  of  that  family.     See  vol.  iii. 
p.  151,  note  *.] 


Die  Nono.  that  honourable  lord  would  so  say,  unless  he  were  much 
abused  by  Mr.  Lee's  information,  both  in  regard  of  his  love 
to  me ;  and  in  regard  it  could  not  proceed  from  a  man  of  so 
great  a  judgment  as  that  lord  is.  For,  I  beseech  your  Lps. 
consider,  may  not  lords,  to  whom  a  business  is  referred,  give 
his  Majesty  good  reason  to  alter  his  mind  in  some  particulars 
which  they  have  debated,  and  not  he  ?  And  may  not  this 
be  done,  without  any  one  of  them  taking  on  him  to  be  a 
second  king  ? 

II.  The  second  charge  was  laid  on  me  by  Sir  Arthur  Hasel- 
rigg :  (which  should  have  come  in  the  day  before,  as  Mr. 
Nicolas  said,  but  that  Sir  Arthur  was  absent  in  the  necessary 
service  of  the  State).  Sir  Arthur  being  single,  and  in  his  own 
case,  says,  '  that  Sir  John  Lambe  presented  a  blind  parson  to 
a  living  of  his.'  If  Sir  John  did  that,  or  any  unworthy  thing 
else,  aetatem  habet,  let  him  answer  for  himself.  He  says 
further,  '  that  this  living  is  an  impropriation,  and  so  a  lay-fee 
by  law ;  and  that  when  he  told  me  so  much,  I  made  him  this 
answer,  That  if  I  lived,  no  man  should  name  or  stand  upon 
his  lay-fee.'  I  conceive,  my  Lords,  here's  a  great  mistake  in 
the  main.  For  I  have  been  credibly  informed,  and  do  believe, 
that  benefice  is  presentative,  and  so  no  lay-fee.  And  then 
there's  no  fault  to  present  unto  it,  so  the  clerk  be  fit. 
Secondly,  there  is  a  main  mistake  in  my  words,  which  I 
remember  well,  and  where  it  was  that  I  spake  them.  My 
words,  under  this  gentleman's  favour,  and  your  Lps.',  were 
these,  and  no  other,  That  I  had  good  information  that  the 
benefice  was  presentative,  and  that  if  I  lived,  I  hoped  to  order 
it  so,  that  no  man  should  make  a  presentative  benefice  a  lay- 
fee  ;  there  were  too  many  of  them  already.  Thirdly,  if  I  did 
speak  the  words  as  they  are  charged,  if  they  come  within 
that  statute  of  six  months,  so  often  mentioned,  to  that  I  refer 
myself.  '  Whatsoever  the  bird  at  this  time  of  the  year  sings ;' 
as  Mr.  Nicolas  was  pleased  to  put  it  upon  me.  And  truly, 
my  Lords,  I  could  easily  return  all  his  bitterness  upon  him 
self,  could  it  befit  my  person,  my  present  condition,  or  my 

III.  The  third  charge  was  about  the  refusing  of  a  pardon,  which 
Mrs.  Bastwick  said  she  produced  in  the  High-Commission 
Court,  some  nine  or  ten  years  since  :  and  she  adds,  that 


'  I  should  then  say,  it  should  not  serve  his  turn/  But  this  Die  Nono. 
was  no  rejecting  of  the  pardon ;  for  she  confesses  I  said, 
'  I  would  move  his  Majesty  about  it/  So  that  if  it  did  not 
serve  his  turn,  it  was  from  the  King  himself,  upon  motion 
made  and  reason  given,  not  from  any  power  assumed  by  the 
High-Commission  or  myself.  And  the  act,  whatever  it  were, 
was  the  act  of  the  whole  court,  not  mine.  As  for  the  words 
(if  mine),  I  give  the  same  answer  as  before,  notwithstanding 
Mr.  Nicolas  his  bird. 

The  fourth  charge  was,  that  whereas  there  was  a  proclama-  IV. 
tion  to  be  printed  about  the  Pacification  with  the  Scots,  it 
was  suddenly  stopped,  and  an  order  after  for  burning  of  the 
303  Pacification.  First,  Mr.  Hunscotb  is  single  in  this  charge. 
Secondly1,  whatsoever  was  done  in  this,  was  by  order  of 
Council :  and  himself  names  an  order,  which  could  not  come 
from  me.  Thirdly,  he  charges  me  with  nothing  but  that  I 
sent  word  the  proclamation  was  to  be  stayed  :  which  if  I  did, 
I  did  it  by  command.  Howsoever,  this  concerns  the  Scottish 
business,  and  therefore  to  the  Act  of  Oblivion  I  refer  myself. 
"  With  this,  that  I  see  by  this  testimony,  Mr.  Hunscourt  (for 
I  took  his  name  uncertainly)  hath  not  yet  forgotten,  (  Thou 
shalt  commit  adultery0/  So  desirous  he  is  to  catch  me  at 
the  press." 

The  fifth  charge  was  about  a  benefice  in  Northampton-  V. 
shire,  in  the  case  of  Mr.  Fautrye,  and  Mr.  Johnson,  and  Dr. 
BeaVsd  succeeding  theme.  In  which  broken  business  (for 
such  it  was),  first,  that  business  all  along  was  acted  by  the 
High-Commission,  not  by  me.  Secondly,  that  though  in 
the  case  of  simony  the  benefice  be  lost,  ipso  facto ;  yet  that 
(156)  must  be  proved  before  the  incumbent  can  be  thrust  out, 
and  another  instituted  ;  else  churchmen  were  in  a  miserable 
condition  for  their  livelihood.  Excommunication  is  in  many 
1  ['Mr.  Hunscot  .  .  .  Secondly/  in  margin.] 

b  [Joseph  Hunscot.  See  above,  pp.  e  [Peter  Fantrart  (called  Fawtrard 

79,  165.]  by  Baker,  Hist,  of  Northamptonshire, 

c  [Referring  to  the  gross  misprint  vol.  ii.  p.  205)  was  presented  to  Pau- 

in  the  edition  of  the  Bible,  for  which  lerspury,  April  6,  1630  (Rymer,  Feed, 

the  printers  were  fined.]  P.  146  [of  VIII.  iii.  166) ;  Ezekiel  Johnson,  on 

orig.  MS.  See  above,  p.  165].  Dec.  2, 1631  (ibid.  p.  223) ;  and  William 

d  [William  Beale  was  elected  Master  Beale,  Oct.  31, 1 637  (ibid.  IX.  iii.  144). 

of  S.  John's  College,  Cambridge,  in  In  all  these  cases  the  living  is  said 

1633.  He  was  one  of  the  chief  sufferers  to  have  been  vacant  by  reason  of 

in  that  Univ.  from  the  Puritans.]  simony.] 


Die  Nono.  cases  void  in  law,  ipso  facto,  and  yet,  ante  latam  sententiam, 
till  sentence  be  orderly  pronounced  against  it,  no  man  shall1 
be  subjected  to  those  fearful  consequences  which  follow  upon 
it.  "  And  upon  this  ground  of  natural  equity,  that  in  the 
statute  concerning  the  uniformity  of  common  prayer  proceeds, 
where  'tis  said,  that  a  party  once  convicted  for  depraving  the 
Common-Prayer  Book,  and  relapsing  into  the  same  crime, 
shall  be  deprived  of  all  his  spiritual  promotions,  ipso  facto  f. 
But  how  ?  without  any  legal  proceedings  ?  No  :  God  forbid. 
For  the  words  preceding  immediately  in  that  statute,  are, '  that 
he  must  be  first  legally  convicted  of  that  criminal  relapse  /  and 
then  follows  ipso  facto,  and  not  before2 :"  and  therefore  the 
superinstitution,  before  the  simony  tried  and  judged,  was 
illegal ;  beside  the  great  danger  to  the  parishioners  while  two 
parsons  and  their  several  friends  are  scrambling  for  the  tithes. 
Secondly,  Fautrye  was  not  censured  for  the  original  cause  of 
simony,  but  for  an  intruder,  and  colluder  too,  with  Jeames 
to  abuse  the  King's  grant  of  the  benefice.  Thirdly,  it  seems 
Fautrye  had  no  better  opinion  of  his  own  cause :  for  he  went 
to  his  benefice  in  Jarsey,  and  set  not  his  title  on  foot  again 
till  after  seven  years,  and  that  I  think  was  when  he  heard 
that  Mr.  Johnson  was  a  pretender  to  it.  And  his  bond  upon 
the  sentence  was  to  make  a  final  peace.  For  the  prohibition, 
which  he  says  was  refused,  I  have  answered  that  before  in 
the  charge  about  prohibitions.  Besides,  it  appears  by  law, 
that  as  prohibitions  may  be  granted  in  some  cases,  so  in  some 
cases  they  may  be  refused  e.  For  Dr.  Beal,  there  is  not  the 
least  show  of  proof  offered,  that  I  brought  him  in ;  if  to  do 
so  be  a  crime. 

Thus  far  Mr.  Fautrye  went.  As  for  Mr.  Johnson's  title, 
he  says,  '  that  the  Lords  ordered  it  for  him,  and  declared  that 
we  in  the  High-Commission  could  put  no  man  out  of  his 
freehold.'  Where  first,  if  your  Lps.  have  ordered  this  busi 
ness,  I  must  crave  to  know  how  far  I  shall  have  leave  to 
speak  to  it:  for  if  there  be  any  errors  charged  upon3  the 
sentence  given  in  the  High-Commission,  if  they  may  not  be 
spoken  to,  they  cannot  be  satisfied.  This  I  am  sure  of,  the 

1  ['it,  no  man  shall'  originally  'him,  he  shall  not'] 

2  ['  And  upon  .  .  .  before :'  on  opposite  page.] 

3  ['charged  upon'  in  margin.] 

f  1  Eliz.  c.  2.  [§  5.]  *  13  Ed.  I. 


304  Commission  hath  power  to  deprive.  For  the  statute  gives  it  Die  Nono. 
power  '  to  use  all  ecclesiastical  and  spiritual  censures h/  of 
which  deprivation  is  known  to  be  one l.  And  that  power  is 
expressly  given,  to  deprive  some  offenders  of  all  their  spiritual 
promotions,,  by  the  statute  following1.  Therefore  I  think  it 
follows  necessarily,  either  that  we  have  power  over  freehold 
in  that  case;  or  else,  that  a  benefice  is  not  a  freehold.  But 
I  have  no  reason  howsoever  to  speak  anything  (were  I  left 
never  so  free)  against  your  Lps/  order,  which  very  honourably 
left  Dr.  Beal  to  the  law ;  as  'tis  confessed  by  Johnson. 

Besides  these  two  in  their  own  cause,  one  Mr.  Jenkins  is  pro 
duced,  "  but  to  what  end  I  know  not,  unless  it  be  to  bespatter 
Dr.  Beal."  He  says,  that  seven  years  since,  Dr.  Beal  was 
Vice -Chancellor  of  Cambridge  k ;  that  in  his  sermon  he  then 
inveighed  bitterly  against  the  power  of  Parliaments,  and 
named  some  unsavoury  speeches  of  his,  both  concerning 
their  persons  and  proceedings.  Surely,  if  Dr.  Beal  did  as  is 
testified,  he  was  much  to  blame.  But  what  is  this  to  me  ? 
If  it  be  said,  '  I  did  not  punish  him :'  how  could  I  punish 
that  I  knew  not  ?  And  I  profess  I  heard  not  of  it  till  now 
at  bar.  If  it  be  said,  '  I  did  prefer  him :'  that  I  do  abso 
lutely  deny ;  and  neither  Mr.  Jenkins,  nor  any  other,  offers 
the  least  proof,  that  I  knew  the  one,  or  did  the  other. 

The  sixth  charge  was  concerning  the  Statutes  of  the  Uni-  VI. 
versity  of  Oxford,  in  which,  and  the  cathedrals  of  the  new 
erection,  Mr.  Nicolas  says,  I  took  on  me  to  be  an  universal 
lawgiver.  Many  such  offices  he  bestows  upon  me,  which  God 
knows,  and  I  believe  he  too,  that  I  never  affected :  no,  my 
Lords,  the  great  necessities  of  that  University  called  upon 
me  for  it :  their  statutes  lay  in  a  miserable  confused  heap : 
when  any  difficulty  arose,  they  knew  not  where  to  look  for 
remedy  or  direction.  Then  into  the  Convocation-House,  and 
make  a  new  statute ;  and  that  many  times  proved  contrary 
to  an  old  one  concerning  the  same  business.  Men  in  the 
meantime  sworn  to  both,  which  could  not  possibly  be  kept 
together.  By  this  means  perjury  was  in  a  manner  unavoid 
able  :  and  themselves  confess  in  their  Register  (which  is  now 

1  ['  For  the  statute  .  .  .  one.'  on  opposite  page.] 

h  1  Eliz.  c.  1,  §  8.  k  [Beale  was  appointed  Vice-Chan- 

1   1  Eliz.  c,  2.  cellor  in  1634.] 


Die  Nono    in  court)  that  till  this  was  done,  they  did  in  a  sort  swear, 
that  they  might  be  forsworn1. 

(157)  Besides,  my  Lords,  I  did  not  abolish  any  the  old 
books,  in  which  the  statutes  lay  so  confused,  some  in  one 
book,  and  some  in  another ;  but  left  them  all  entire  in  the 
University,  in  case  in  any  after-times  any  use  might  be  made 
of  them.  Nor  did  I  with  them  as  some  ancient  philosophers 
are  said  to  have  done  with  the  works  of  some  that  went 
before  them :  that  is,  make  them  away,  to  advance  their  own 
honour  the  more,  as  if  without  any  help  of  former  pains,  they 
had  done  all  themselves.  Holding  it  honour  more  than 
enough  for  me,  that  God  had  so  highly  blessed  me  in  this 
work,  as  to  finish  and  settle  those  statutes ;  which  the  greatest 
men  in  their  times,  Cardinal  Wolseym  first,  and  after  him 
Cardinal  Pole  n,  assayed,  but  left  as  imperfect  as  they  found 
them.  Neither  did  I  anything  in  this  work,  but  by  the 
consent  of  the  University,  and  according  to  an  Act  (and  a 
delegacy  thereby  appointed)  of  their  own  Convocation  °. 

Mr.  Nicolas  says,  '  there  is  a  rasure  in  one  of  the  Acts, 
and  supplied  in  other  ink/  I  told  your  Lps.  then  presently,  395 
(being  loth  to  lie  never  so  little  under  such  an  imputation,) 
that l  if  there  be  any  such,  it  must  be  charged  upon  the  Uni 
versity,  not  upon  me ;  for  those  records  were  never  in  my 
hands,  nor  is  it  so  much  as  said  they  were.  And  since  I 
withdrew  to  make  my  answer,  I  have  viewed  the  record,  and 
an  alteration  or  addition  there  is;  and  'tis  a  known  hand. 
"Tis  Dr.  Duppa's  hand,  now  L.  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  and  then 
Vice-Chancellor  P,  who  I  doubt  not  but  is  able  to  give  a  good 
account  of  what  he  did  therein,  and  why.  And  for  aught 
appears,  'tis  nothing  but  the  amendment  of  some  slip,  which 
their  ignorant  register  French  1  had  failed  in,  and  the  Vice- 
Chancellor  thought  it  safest  to  mend  with  his  own  hand. 
And  for  my  own  part,  if  ever  I  did  anything  worth  thanks 
1  ['being  loth  .  .  .  that '  in  margin.] 

I  Jurati  ante,  ut  perjuri  evaderent,      pp.  132,  133.] 

[Reg.  Conv.  R.]  fol.  69.  [In  the  letter  °  [See  Hist,  of  Chancellorship,  p. 

in   which  the  University   submitted  102,  note  *.] 

the  Statutes  to  the  ordering  of  the  P  [Duppa  was  Vice-Chancellor  from 

Archbishop,  quoted  in  Hist,  of  Chan-  July  19,  1632,  to  July  26,  1634.]; 

cellorship,  p.  91.]  i  [John  French,  Fellow  of  Merton 

m  [See  Wood's  Annals,  ad  ann.  1518,  College,    elected   Registrar  in   1629. 

1520,  pp.  15,  18,  19.]  Wood  terms  him  'a  careless    man, 

II  [See  Wood's  Annals,  ad  an.  1556,  though  a  good  scholar.'  (F.  0.  i.  452.)] 


from  the  public  in  all  my  life,  I  did  it  in  this  work  for  that  Die  Nono. 
University.  And  I  wish  with  all  my  heart  the  times  were  so 
open,  as  that  I  might  have  the  University's  testimony,  both 
of  me  and  it.  "  Since  I  cannot,  a  great  lord  present  in  the 
House,  when  this  charge  was  laid  against  me,  supplied  in  part 
their  absence.  For  he  was  overheard  say  to  another  lord, 
*  I  think  my  Ld.  Archbishop  hath  done  no  good  work  in  all 
his  life,  but  these  men  will  object  it  as  a  crime  against  him 
before  they  have  done/  ' 

With  this  charge  about  the  statutes,  it  was  let  fall,  (and 
I  well  know  why ;  "  it  was  to  heat  a  noble  person  then 
present1/')  '  that  I  procured  myself  to  be  chosen  Chancellor 
of  that  University.'  If  I  had  so  done,  it  might  have  been  a 
great  ambition  in  me,  but  surely  no  treason.  But,  my  Lords, 
I  have  proof  great  store,  might  I  be  enabled  to  fetch  it  from 
Oxford,  that  I  was  so  far  from  endeavouring  to  procure  this 
honour  to  myself,  as  that  I  laboured  by  my  letters  for  an 
other.  And  'tis  well  known,  that  when  they  had  chosen  me, 
I  went  instantly  to  his  Majesty,  so  soon  as  ever  I  heard  it, 
and  humbly  besought  him,  that  I  might  refuse  it,  as  well 
foreseeing  the  envy  that  would  follow  me  for  it ;  and  it  did 
plentifully  everyway.  But  this  for  some  reasons  his  Majesty 
would  not  suffer  me  to  do1. 

Then  were  objected  against  me  divers  particulars  contained 
in  those  statutes1.  1.  '  As  first,  the  making  of  new  oaths.'  The 
charters  of  the  University  are  not  new,  and  they  gave  power 
to  make  statutes  for  themselves,  and  they  have  ever  been  upon 
oath.  2.  The  next  illegality  is,  '  that  men  are  tied  to  obey  the 
Proctors  in  singing  the  Litany.'  This  is  ancient3,  and  in  use 
long  before  ever  I  came  to  the  University,  and  it  is  according 
to  the  Liturgy  of  the  Church  of  England  established  by  law. 
3.  Thirdly,  'the  statute  of  bannition  from  the  University1.3 
But  there  is  nothing  more  ancient  in  the  University  Statutes 
than  this.  4.  Fourthly,  '  that  nothing  should  be  proposed  in 
Convocation,  but  what  was  consented  unto  among  the  Heads 

1  [P.  144.  is  written  in  the  margin,  against  this  place,  in  the  Archbishop's 
hand,  referring  to  the  passage  inserted  in  that  page  of  the  original  MS.,  but 
belonging  to  this  place.  See  above,  p.  161.] 

r    [Philip,  Earl  of  Pembroke,  his  B),  fol.  139  b.] 

competitor  for  the  Chancellorship.]  l  [See  tit.  xv.  De  Moribus  Confor- 

*  [Corp.  Stat.  tit.  ix.  sect.  i.  §  5,  from  mandis,  passim.] 
the  Book  of  the  Senior  Proctor  (marked 


Die  Nono.  of  Colleges  first ;  which  was  said  to  be  against  the  liberty  of 
the  students11.'  The  young  Mrs.  of  Arts,  void  of  experience, 
were  grown  so  tumultuous,  that  no  peace  could  be  kept  in  the 
University,  till  my  worthy  predecessor,  the  Right  Honourable 
William  E.  of  Pembroke,  settled  this  order  among  them.  As 
he  did  also  upon  the  same  grounds  settle  the  present  way  of 
the  (158)  choice  of  their  Proctors  x.  In  both  which,  I  did  but 
follow,  and  confirm  (for  so  much  as  lay  in  me)  the  good  and 
peaceable  grounds  which  he  had  laid  in  those  two  businesses.  306 
"  And  Mr.  Brown,  who  in  the  summing  up  of  my  charge 
urged  this  against  me,  mainly  mistook  in  two  things.  The 
one  was,  that  he  said,  this  inhibition  of  proposals  was  in  Con 
gregations  :  whereas  it  was  only  in  Convocations,  where  more 
weighty  businesses  are  handled.  The  other  was,  that  this 
stay  of  proposals  was  made,  till  '  I  might  be  first  acquainted 
with  them/  No  ;  it  was  but  till  the  Heads  of  Colleges  had 
met,  and  considered  of  them,  for  avoiding  of  tumultuary 
proceedings.  And  when  my  honourable  predecessor  made 
that  order,  it  was  highly  commended  everywhere ;  and  is  it 
now  degenerated  into  a  crime,  because  it  is  made  up  into  a 
statute1?"  5.  Fifthly,  'that  some  things  are  referred  to 
arbitrary  penalties  V  And  that  some  things  are  so  referred  is 
usual  in  that  University,  and  many  colleges  have  a  particular 
statute  for  it.  Nor  is  this  any  more  power  than  ordinary 
schoolmasters  have,  which  have  not  a  statute-law  for  every 
punishment  they  use  in  schools.  And  in  divers  things,  the 
old  known  statute  is,  that  the  Vice-Chancellor  shall  proceed 
grosso  modo,  that  is,  without  the  regular  forms  of  law,  for 
the  more  speedy  ending  of  differences  among  the  scholars. 
6.  Sixthly,  'that  the  statute  made  by  me  against  conventicles 
is  very  strict7-/  But  for  these  that  statute  is  express,  De 
illicitis  Conventiculis,  and  I  hope  such  as  are  unlawful  may  be 
both  forbid,  and  punished.  Besides,  it  is  according  to  the 
charter  of  Richard  the  Second  to  that  University a.  7.  The 
seventh  was  '  the  power  of  discommoning/  But  this  also  hath 
ever  been  in  power  and  in  usage  in  that  University ;  as  is  com- 
1  ['  And  Mr.  Brown,  .  .  .  statute  V  on  opposite  page.] 

u  [Corp.  Stat.  tit.  x.  sect.  ii.  §  2;  bus  Conformand is,  passim.] 
and  tit.  xiii.]  z  [Tit.  xv.  §  12  [leg.  13]. 

1  [See  Wood's  Annals,  ad  an.  1629,          a  [As  is  expressly   stated    in    the 

p.  365  ;  and  Corp.  Stat.  Append,  p.  56.]  statute  itself.] 

y  [See  Corp.  Stat.  tit.  xv.  De  Mori- 


monly  known  to  all  Oxford-men.  And  no  longer  since  than  Die  Nono. 
King  James  his  time,  Bishop  Kingb,  then  Vice-Chancellor, 
discommoned  three  or  four  townsmen  together.  8.  Next, 
'  that  students  were  bound  to  go  to  prison  upon  the  Vice- 
Chancellor's  or  Proctors'  command  c.}  This  also  was  ancient, 
and  long  before  my  coming  to  the  University.  And  your 
Lps.  may  be  sure  the  delegacy  appointed  by  themselves  would 
not  have  admitted  it,  had  it  not  been  ancient  and  usual. 
Lastly,  '  about  the  stay  of  granting  graces,  unless  there  were 
testimony  from  the  bishop  of  the  diocese  V  This  was  for  no 
graces,  but  of  such  as  live  not  resident  in  the  University,  and 
so  they  could  not  judge  of  their  manners  and  conversation. 
And  for  their  conformity  to  the  Church  of  England,  none  (as 
I  conceive)  can  be  a  fitter  witness  than  the  bp.  of  the  diocese 
in  which  they  resided.  And,  my  Lords,  for  all  these  thus 
drawn  up  by  some  of  their  own  body,  I  obtained  of  his 
Majesty  his  broad  seal  for  confirmation e :  and  therefore  no 
one  thing  in  them  is  by  any  assumption  of  papal  power,  as 
'tis  urged,  but  by  the  King's  power  only. 

Then  followed  the  seventh  charge,  about  the  statutes  of  VII. 
some  cathedral  churches.  First,  my  Lords,  for  this  I  did  it 
by  letters-patent  from  the  King,  bearing  date  Mar.  31, 
decimo  Caroli f,  and  is  extant  upon  record.  And  all  that  was 
done  was  per  juris  remedia,  and  so  nothing  intended  against 
law,  nor  done,  that  I  know.  They  had  extreme  need  of 
statutes,  for  all  lay  loose  for  want  of  confirmation,  and1  men 
did  what  they  listed :  and  I  could  not  but  observe  it,  for  I 
was  Dean  of  Gloucester,  where  I  found  it  so.  In  seeking  to 
remedy  this,  I  had  nothing  but  my  labour  for  my  pains,  and 
307  now  this  accusation  to  boot.  The  particulars  urged  are, 
1.  '  that  I  had  ordered,  that  nothing  should  be  done  in  these 
statutes,  me  inconsul£o.'  And  I  had  great  reason  for  it. 
1  ['  for  want  of  confirmation,  and '  in  margin.] 

b  [Dr.  John  King,  Dean  of  Christ-  (p.  304).] 

Church  (afterwards  Bishop  of  London),  c  [Tit.  xv.  §  2,  and  passim.] 

was  Vice- Chancellor,  1607-1610.  Wood  d  Tit.  ix.  [sect,  iii.]  §  2. 

terms  him  "  a  fierce  maintainer  and  e  [The  King's  ratification  is  prefixed 

defender  of  the  University  privileges."  to  the  Corpus  Statutorum.] 

(Fasti,  p.  118.)      See  a  long  account  f  [The  document  is  recorded  in  the 

of  these  proceedings  in  Wood's  Annals,  Archbishop's  register.  It  is  erroneously 

ad  an.  1609,  pp.  299-304.  They  ended  dated  in  Wilkins'  Cone.  (torn.  iv.  pp. 

in  the  discommoning  of  several  of  the  532,  533,)  '  anno  regni  nostri  decimo 

citizens,  whose  names  are  there  given  tertio.'] 


Die  Nono.  For  since  I  was  principally  trusted  in  that  work  by  his 
Majesty,  the  King,  if  any  complaint  were  made,  would  expect 
the  account  from  me.  And  how  could  I  give  it,  if  other 
men  might  do  all,  and  I  not  be  so  much  as  consulted  before 
they  passed  ? 

2.  '  That  I  made  a  statute  against  letting  leases  into  three 
lives  s.'  But  first,  my  Lds.,  the  statute  which  makes  it 
lawful  to  let  leases  for  one-and-twenty  years,  or  three  lives, 
hath  this  limitation  in  it,  'that  they  shall  not  let  for  any 
more  years  than  are  limited  by  the  said  colleges  or  churches11.' 
Now  in  Winchester  Church,  and  some  other,  the  old l  local 
statute  is  most  plain,  that  they  shall  let  no  lease  into  lives. 
Let  the  dean  and  prebendaries  answer  their  own  acts  and 
their  consciences  as  they  can.  And  in  those  statutes  which 
I  did  not  find  pregnant  to  that  purpose,  I  did  not  make  the 
statute  absolute,  but  left  them  free  to  renew  all  such  leases 
as  were  anciently  in  lives  before.  And  this  give  me  leave  to 
say  to  your  Lps.  without  offence ;  If  but  a  few  more  leases 
be  granted  into  lives,  no  bishop  nor  cathedral  church  shall 
be  able  to  subsist.  And  (159)  this  is  considerable  also,  that, 
as  the  state  of  the  Church  yet  stands,  the  laity  have  the 
benefit,  by  the  leases  which  they  hold,  of  more  than  five 
parts  of  all  the  bishops',  deans  and  chapters',  and  college 
revenues  in  England.  "  And  shall  it  be  yet  an  eyesore  to 
serve  themselves  with  the  rest  of  their  own  ?  This  evidence 
Mr.  Browne,  whose  part  it  was  to  sum  up  the  evidence 
against  me  at  the  end  of  the  charge,  wholly  omitted :  for 
what  cause  he  best  knows 2." 

VIII.  The  next  charge  'was  about  my  Injunctions  in  my  visita 
tion  of  Winton  and  Sarum,  for  the  taking  down  of  some 
houses.'  But  they  were  such,  as  were  upon  consecrated 
ground,  and  ought  not  to  have  been  built  there ;  and  yet 
with  caution  sufficient  to  preserve  the  lessees  from  over 
much  damage  3.  For  it  appears  apud  acta,  that  they  were 
not  to  be  pulled  down  till  their  several  leases  were  expired l. 

1  ['old'  in  margin.]  2  ['This  evidence  .  .  .  knows.'  on  opposite  page.] 

3  [There  originally  followed  in  this  place,  '  And  since  the  law  of  the  land 
hath  provided.'  The  words  were  afterwards  erased.] 

*  [See  the  letters  of  King  Charles  I.  'l  [This  does  not  so  appear  in  the 

to  Laud  on  this  subject,  in  Wilkins'  Injunctions  to  Winchester  Cathedral. 

Concilia,  torn.  iv.  pp.  493,  494. J  The  Injunctions  to  Salisbury  Cathe- 

h  13  Eliz.  cap.  10,  §  penult.  dral  have  not  been  met  with.] 


And  that  they  were  houses  not  built  long  since,  but  by  Die  Nono. 
them ;  and  that  all  this  was  to  be  done,  to  the  end *  that  the 
Church  might  suffer  no  damage  by  them  :  and  that  this 
demolition  was  to  be  made 2  juxta  Decreta  regni,  according 
to  the  Statutes  of  the  kingdom.  Therefore  nothing  enjoined 
contrary  to  law:  or  if  anything  were,  the  injunction  took 
not  place,  by  the  very  tenor  of  that  which  was  charged. 
"Mr.  Browne  omitted  this  charge  also,  though  he  hung 
heavily  upon  the  like  at  St.  Paul's,  though  there  was  satis 
faction  given,  and  not  here  3." 

The  ninth  charge  was  my  intended  visitation  of  both  the  IX. 
Universities,  Oxford  and  Cambridge.  For  my  troubles  began 
then  to  be  foreseen  by  me,  and  I  visited  them  not.  1.  This 
was  urged  as  a  thing  directly  against  law.  But  this  I  con 
ceive  cannot  be,  so  long  as  it  was  with  the  King's  knowledge, 
and  by  his  warrant.  2.  Secondly,  because  all  power  of  the 
King's  visitations  was  saved  in  the  warrant,  and  that  with 
consent  of  all  parts.  3.  Thirdly,  because  nothing  in  this 
was  surreptitiously  gotten  from  the  King,  all  being  done  at  a 
most  full  Council-table,  and  great  counsel  at  law  heard  on 
308  both  sides k.  4.  Fourthly,  because  it  did  there  appear,  that 
three  of  my  predecessors  did  actually  visit  the  Universities, 
and  th&tjure  Ecclesice  SUCK  metropoliticce.  5.  Fifthly,  no  im 
munity  pleaded,  why  the  Archbishop  should  not  visit ;  for  the 
instance  against  Cardinal  Poole  is  nothing.  For  he  attempted 
to  visit,  not  only  by  the  right  of  his  See,  but  by  his  power 
legatine  from  the  Pope ;  whereas  the  University  charters  are 
express,  that  such  power  l  of  visitation  cannot  be  granted  per 
Bullas  Papales.  And  yet  now  'tis  charged  against  me,  that 
T  challenged  this4  by  Papal  power.  "  Mr.  Browne  wholly  neg- 

Hhat  all ...  end'  originally  'to  this  end'] 

*  that  this  .  .  .  made  '  in  margin.     Originally  '  all  this'] 

'  Mr.  Browne  omitted  .  .  .  here.'  on  opposite  page.] 

'that  I  challenged  this'  in  margin.     Originally  '  that  I  did  this  now'] 

k  [See  an  account  of  the  proceedings  Universities,  in  right  of  his  See,  about 

in  Rushworth's  Collections,  vol.  ii.  pp.  the  year  1635.  Which  being  seized  on 

324,  seq.    Some  papers  relating  to  the  by  Pryn,  among  his  other  papers  at 

Archbishop's  claim  to  visit  the  Uni-  Lambeth,   were    by   him,    after    the 

versity  of  Cambridge,  will  be  found  Archbishop's  death,  published  in  his 

in  vol.  v.  pp.  555,  seq.}*  own  name,  with  this  title,  "The  Plea 

1    The   Archbishop    had    collected  of  the  University  of  Oxford  refuted, 

many  papers,  decrees,  and  precedents,  &c."    London,  1647.    Eight  sheets  in 

to  assert  his  privilege  of  visiting  the  4to.—  H.  W. 

LAUD. — VOL.  iv.  O 


Die  Nono.  lected  this  charge  also,  which,  making  such  a  show,  I  think 

he  would  not  have  done,  had  he  found  it  well  grounded." 
X.  The  tenth  charge  was  my  visitation  of  Merton  College 
in  Oxford.  The  witness,  Sir  Nathaniel  Brent m,  the  Warden 
of  the  college,  and  principally  concerned  in  that  business. 
1.  He  said,  first,  fthat  no  visitation  held  so  long/  But  if  he 
consult  his  own  office,  he  may  find  one  much  longer,  held 
and  continued  at  All-  Souls  College  by  my  worthy  predecessor, 
Archbishop  Whitgift n.  2.  Secondly,  he  urged  'that  I  should 
say  I  would  be  Warden  for  seven  years/  If  I  did  so  say, 
there  was  much  need  I  should  make  it  good.  3.  Thirdly, 
'  that  one  Mr.  Rich.  Nevil,  Fellow  of  that  college,  lay  abroad 
in  an  ale-house,  that  a  wench  was  got  with  child  in  that 
house,  and  he  accused  of  it ;  and  that  this  was  complained  of 
tome;  and  Sir  Nath.  Brent  accused  for  conspiring  with  the 
ale-wife  against  Nevil.'  I  am  not  here  to  accuse  the  one  or 
defend  the  other.  But  the  case  is  this.  This  cause  between 
them  was  public,  and  came  to  hearing  in  the  Vice- Chan 
cellor's  Court,  witnesses  examined,  Mr.  Nevil  acquitted,  and 
the  ale-wife  punished.  In  all  this  I  had  no  hand.  Then  in 
my  visitation  it  was  again  complained  of  to  me.  I  liked  not 
the  business ;  but  forbare  to  do  anything  in  it,  because  it  had 
been  legally  censured  upon  the  place.  "  This  part  of  the 
charge  Mr.  Browne  urged  against  me  in  the  House  of  Com 
mons,  and  I  gave  it  the  same  answer/'  4.  Lastly,  when 
I  sat  to  hear  the  main  business  of  that  college,  Sir  Nathaniel 
Brent  was  beholding  to  me  that  he  continued  Warden.  For 
in  Archbp.  Warham's  time,  a  predecessor  of  his  was  expelled 
for  less  than  was  proved  against  him  °.  And  I  found  that 
true  which  one  of  my  visitors  had  formerly  told  me,  namely, 
(160)  That  Sir  Nathaniel  Brent  had  so  carried  himself  in  that 
college,  as  that  if  he  were  guilty  of  the  like,  he  would  lay  his 

m  [Nathaniel  Brent,  who  had  mar-  following  year,  was  compelled  to  re- 

ried  the  niece  of  Abp.  Abbot,  was  sign  it  in  1650;  and  died  in  1652. 

made    Commissary    of   the    Diocese  (Wood,  Ath.  Ox.  iii.  333 — 335.)] 

of    Canterbury,    and    Vicar-General.  n  [Strype  mentions  two  visitations  of 

Though  in  these  capacities  he  carried  All  Souls  College,  by  Abp.  Whitgift, 

on   Abp.   Laud's  visitation,    on   the  in  1592  and  1602.] 

change  of  his  fortune  he  sided  with  °  [The  person  here  spoken  of,  was 

his  enemies,  took  the  Covenant,  and  Richard  Rawlms,  who  was  deprived  of 

openly  joined  the  rebels.     He  was  de-  his  Wardenship  in  1521,  and  in  1523 

prived  of  his  Wardenship  by  the  King  was  made  Bishop  of  S.  David's.  (Wood, 

in  1645  ;   and    though  restored  the  Ath.  Ox.  ii.  743.)] 


key  under  the  door,  and  be  gone,  rather  than  come  to  answer  Die  None, 
it.     Yet  I  did  not  think  it  fit  to  proceed  so  rigidly.     But 
while  I  was  going  to  open  some  of  the  particulars  against 
him,  Mr.  Nicolas  cut  me  off,  and  told  the  Lords,  this  was 
to  scandalize  their  witnesses.     So  I  forbare. 

Then  followed  the  last  charge  of  this  day,  concerning  a  XL 
book  of  Dr.  Bastwick's,  for  which  he  was  censured  in  the 
High- Commission.  The  witnesses  in  this  charge  were  three. 
Mr.  Burton,  a  mortal  enemy  of  mine,  and  so  he  hath  showed 
himself.  Mrs.  Bastwick,  a  woman  and  a  wife,  and  well 
tutored:  for  she  had  a  paper,  and  all  written  which  she 
309  had  to  say ;  though  I  saw  it  not  till  'twas  too  late.  And 
Mr.  Hunscot,  a  man  that  comes  in  to  serve  all  turns  against 
me,  since  the  sentence  passed  against  the  printers,  for,  '  Thou 
shalt  commit  adultery  P/ 

1 .  In  the  particulars  of  this  charge,  'tis  first  said,  '  that  this 
book  was  written  contra  Episcopos  Latiales^.  But  how  cun 
ningly  soever  this  was  pretended,  'tis  more  than  manifest,  it 
was  purposely  written  and  divulged  against  the  bishops  and 
Church  of  England.  2.  Secondly, '  that  I  said  that  Christian 
bishops  were  before  Christian  kings :'  so  Burton  and  Mrs. 
Bastwick.  And  with  due  reverence  to  all  kingly  authority 
be  it  spoken,  who  can  doubt  but  that  there  were  many  Chris 
tian  bishops  before  any  king  was  Christian  ?  3.  Thirdly, 
Mr.  Burton  says,  '  that  I  applied  those  words  in  the  Psalm, 
"Whom  thou  mayest  make  princes  in  all  lands r,"  to  the 
bishops.'  For  this,  if  I  did  err  in  it,  many  of  the  Fathers  of 
the  Church  misled  me,  who  interpret  that  place  so s.  And  if 
I  be  mistaken,  'tis  no  treason.  But  I  shall  ever  follow  their 
comments  before  Mr.  Burton's.  4.  Fourthly,  Mrs.  Bastwick 
says  that  I  then  said,  '  no  bishop  and  no  king  :'  if  I  did  say 
so,  I  learned  it  of  a  wise  and  experienced  author,  King  James, 
who  spake  it  out  and  plainly  in  the  Conference  at  Hampton- 

P  [See  above,  pp.  79,  165,  185.]  Episcopi .  .  .  '  Constitues  eos  principes 

i  [The  title  of  Bastwick's  book  was,  super  omnem  tcrram.'     H8ec  est  Ca- 

"  Flagellum  Pontificis  et  Episcoporum  tholica  Ecclesia;   filii  ejus  constituti 

Latialium."  It  was  published  in  1635.]  sunt  principes  super  omnem  terrain, 

r  psa].  xiv.  17.  filii  ejus  constituti  sunt  pro  patribus. 

"   [It  may  be  sufficient  to  quote  the  — S.  Aug.  Enarr.  in  Ps.  xliv.  §  32.  Op., 

language  of  S.  Augustine  :  "  Quid  est,  torn.  iv.  coll.  564.  C.  D.,  565.  A.  Other 

«  Pro  patribus  tuis  nati  sunt  tibi  filii  r  passages  of  the  Fathers,  to  the  same 

Patres  missi  suiit  Apostoli,  per  Aposto-  effect,  are  quoted  in  Hickes's  Treatises, 

lis  filii  nati  sunt  tibi,  constituti  sunt  vol.  ii.  pp.  344 — 346.] 

O   2 


Die  Nono.  Court  *.  And  I  hope  it  cannot  be  treason  in  me  to  repeat  it. 
5.  Fifthly,  Mrs.  Bastwick  complained,  f  that  I  committed  her 
husband  close  prisoner/  Not  I,  but  the  High-Commission ; 
not  close  prisoner  to  his  chamber,  but  to  the  prison,  not  to 
go  abroad  with  his  keeper.  Which  is  all  the  close  imprison 
ment  which  I  ever  knew  that  court  use.  6.  Lastly,  the  pinch 
of  this  charge  is,  ( that  I  said,  I  received  my  jurisdiction  from 
God,  and  from  Christ,  contrary  to  an  Act  of  Parliament,  which 
says  Bps.  derive  their  jurisdiction  from  the  King  V  This  is 
witnessed  by  all  three,  and  that  Dr.  Bastwick  read  the  statute. 
That  statute  speaks  plainly  of  jurisdiction  in  for o  contentioso, 
and  places  of  judicature,  and  no  other.  And  all  this  forensical 
jurisdiction,  I  and  all  Bps.  in  England  derive  from  the  Crown. 
But  my  order,  my  calling,  my  jurisdiction  in  foro  conscienticR, 
that  is  from  God,  and  from  Christ,  and  by  divine  and  aposto 
lical  right.  And  of  this  jurisdiction  it  was  that  I  then  spake 
(if  I  named  '  jurisdiction '  at  all,  and  not  my  calling  in  gene 
ral).  For  I  then  sate  in  the  High-Commission,  and  did 
exercise  the  former1  jurisdiction  under  the  broad  seal,  and 
could  not  be  so  simple  to  deny  the  power  by  which  I  then 
sate.  Beside,  the  Canons  of  the  Church  of  England,  to  which 
I  have  subscribed,  are  plain  for  it x.  Nay  further :  the  use 
and  exercise  of  my  jurisdiction  in  foro  conscientia,  may  not 
be  but  by  the  leave  and  power  of  the  King  within  his  domi 
nions.  And  if  bishops  and  presbyters  be  all  one  order  (as 
these  men  contend  for),  then  bishops  must  be  jure  divinOj  for 
so  they  maintain  that  presbyters  are.  "  This  part  of  the 
charge  Mr.  Browne  pressed  in  his  report  to  the  House  of 
Commons :  and  when  I  gave  this  same  answer,  he  in  his 
reply  said  nothing  but  the  same  over  and  over  again,  save 
that  he  said,  '  I  fled  to  he  knew  not  what  inward  calling  and 
jurisdiction ;'  which  point  as  I  expressed  it,  if  he  understood 
not,  he  should  not  have  undertaken  to  judge  me." 
1  ['the  former'  in  margin.] 

*  Conf.  at  Hampt.  Court,  [by  Wil-         u  37  Hen.  VIII.  cap.  17.  [§  2.] 
liam  Barlow,]    p.  84.    [p.  82.    Lond.         x  Can.  1. 


310  CAP.  XXXII. 

THE  16th  of  May  I  had  an  order  from  the  Lords,  for  free  Mali  16. 
access  of  four  of  my  servants  to  me. 

On  Friday,  May  17, 1  received  a  note  from  the  Committee,  Mali  17. 
that  they  intended  to  proceed  upon  part  of  the  sixth  original 
Article  remaining,   and  upon  the  seventh;    which   seventh 
Article  follows  in  hac  verba  :  — 

That  he  hath  traitorously  endeavoured  to  alter  and  subvert 
God's  true  religion  by  law  established  in  this  realm,  and 
instead  thereof  to  set  up  Popish  superstition  and  idolatry. 
And  to  that  end  hath  declared  and  maintained  in  speeches 
and  printed  books,  divers  Popish  doctrines  and  opinions, 
contrary  to  the  Articles  of  Religion  established.  He  hath 
urged  and  enjoined  divers  Popish  and  superstitious  cere 
monies,  without  any  warrant  of  law ;  and  hath  cruelly 
persecuted  those  who  have  opposed  the  same,  by  corporal 
punishment  and  imprisonment ;  and  most  unjustly  vexed 
others  ivho  refused  to  conform  thereunto,  by  ecclesiastical 
censures  of  excommunication,  suspension,  deprivation,  and 
degradation,  contrary  to  the  law  of  this  kingdom1. 


This  day,  May  20,  Mr.  Sergeant  Wild  undertook  the  busi-  Mali  20, 
ness  against  me.  And  at  his  entrance  he  made  a  speech,  Monday. 
being  now  to  charge  me  with  matter  of  religion.  In  this 
speech  he  spake  of  a  tide  which  came  not  in  all  at  once. 
And  so  he  said  it  was  in  the  intended  alteration  of  religion. 
First  a  connivance,  then  a  toleration,  then  a  subversion.  Nor 
this,  nor  that.  But  a  tide  it  seems  he  will  have  of  religion. 
(161)  And  I  pray  God  His  truth  (the  true  Protestant  religion 
here  established)  sink  not  to  so  low  an  ebb,  that  men  may  with 
ease  wade  over  to  that  side,  which  this  gentleman  seems  most 

1  ['  That  he  hath  .  .  .  kingdom'  on  opposite  page.] 


Die  to  hate.     He  fears  both  '  ceremonies  and  doctrine/     But  in 

cimo>     both  he  fears  where  no  fear  is ;  which  I  hope  shall  appear. 

He  was  pleased  to  begin  with  (  ceremonies/ 

I.         In  this  he  charged,  first,  e  my  chapel  at  Lambeth,  and 
innovation  in  ceremonies  there/ 

(1.)  The  first  witness  for  this  was  Dr.  Featlya;  he  says, 
'  there  were  alterations  since  my  predecessor's  time/  And 
I  say  so  too,  or  else  my  chapel  must  lie  more  undecently  than 
is  fit  to  express.  He  says,  'I  turned  the  table  north  and 
south/  The  injunction  says  it  shall  be  sob.  And  then  the 
innovation  was  theirs  in  going  from,  not  mine  in  returning 
to  that  way  of  placing  it.  "  Here  Mr.  Browne,  in  his  last  reply 
in  the  House  of  Commons,  said,  that  I  cut  the  injunction  short, 
because  in  the  words  immediately  following,  'tis  ordered, '  that  311 
this  place  of  standing  shall  be  altered  when  the  communion  is 
administered/  But  first,  the  charge  against  me  is  only  about 
the  place  of  it :  of  which  that  injunction  is  so  careful,  that  it 
commands,  f  that  when  the  communion  is  done,  it  be  placed 
where  it  stood  before/  Secondly,  it  was  never  charged 
against  me,  that  I  did  not  remove  it  at  the  time  of  commu 
nion  ;  nor  doth  the  reason  expressed  in  the  injunction  require 
it ;  '  which  is  when  the  number  of  communicants  is  great,  and 
that  the  minister  may  be  the  better  heard  of  them/  Neither 
of  which  was  necessary  in  my  chapel,  where  my  number  was 
not  great,  and  all  might  easily  hear/' 

(2.)  The  second  thing  which  Dr.  Featly  said,  was  in  down 
right  terms,  'that  the  chapel  lay  nastily,  all  the  time  he 
served  in  that  house/  Was  it  one  of  my  faults,  too,  to 
cleanse  it? 

(3.)  Thirdly,  he  says,  '  the  windows  were  not  made  up  with 
coloured  glass,  till  my  time/  The  truth  is,  they  were  all 
shameful  to  look  on,  all  diversely  patched,  like  a  poor  beggar's 
coat.  Had  they  had  all  white  glass,  I  had  not  stirred  them. 
And  for  the  crucifix,  he  confesses  it  was  standing  in  my  pre 
decessor's  time,  though  a  little  broken :  so  I  did  but  mend  it, 

*  [Dr.  Daniel  Featley,  or  Fairclough,  account  of   the  circumstances  of  his 

originally  a  chorister  of  Magdalen  Col-  dismissal.     See  Wood,  Ath.  Ox.   iii. 

lege,  afterwards  Scholar  and  Fellow  of  1 58,  where  mention  is  also  made  of 

Corpus  Christi  College,  Oxford.     He  his  other  preferments.] 
became  chaplain  to  A  bp.  Abbot  about          b  Injuncfc.  of  Q.  Eliz.  fine.    [VVil- 

1614,  and  left  his  service  in  1625.  His  kins'  Cone.  torn.  iv.  p.  188.] 
nephew,  John  Featley,  gives  a  curious 


I  did  not  set  it  up  (as  was  urged  against  me).  "  And  it  was  Die 
utterly  mistaken  by  Mr.  Brown c,  that  I  did  repair  the  story  Decimo- 
of  those  windows,  by  their  like  in  the  Mass -book.  No,  but 
I,  and  my  secretary,  made  out  the  story,  as  well  as  we  could, 
by  the  remains  that  were  unbroken.  Nor  was  any  proof  at 
all  offered,  that  I  did  it  by  the  pictures  in  the  Mass-book ; 
but  only  Mr.  Pryn  testified,  that  such  pictures  were  there : 
whereas  this  argument  is  of  no  consequence ;  There  are  such 
pictures  in  the  Missal ;  therefore  I  repaired  my  windows  by 
them.  The  windows  contain  the  whole  story  from  the  creation 
to  the  day  of  judgment :  three  lights  in  a  window  :  the  two 
side-lights  contain  the  types  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  the 
middle  light  the  antitype  and  verity  of  Christ  in  the  New: 
and  I  believe  the  types  are  not  in  the  pictures  in  the  Missal. 
In  the  meantime,  I  know  no  crime  or  superstition  in  this 
history :  and  though  Calvin  do  not  approve  images  in  churches, 
yet  he  doth  approve  very  well  of  them  which  contain  a  history ; 
and  says  plainly,  that  these  have  their  use  in  docendo  et  admo- 
nendo,  in  teaching  and  admonishing  the  people  d  :  and  if  they 
have  that  use,  why  they  may  not  instruct  in  the  Church,  as 
well  as  out,  I  know  not.  Nor  do  the  Homilies  °  in  this  parti 
cular  differ  much  from  Calvin." 

But  here  the  statute  of  Ed.  VI.  was  charged  against  me, 
'  which  requires  the  destruction  of  all  images,  as  well  in  glass- 
windows,  as  elsewhere  V  "  And  this  was  also  earnestly  pressed 
by  Mr.  Brown,  when  he  repeated  the  sum  of  the  charge 
against  me  in  the  House  of  Commons."  To  which  I  answered 
at  both  times  :  First,  that  the  statute  of  Ed.  VI.  spake  of 
other  images ;  and  that  images  in  glass- windows  were  neither 
mentioned  nor  meant  in  that  law :  the  words  of  the  statute 
are,  '  Any  images  of  stone,  timber,  alabaster,  or  earth ;  graven, 
carved,  or  painted,  taken  out  of  any  church,  &c.,  shall  be 
destroyed/  &c.,  and  not  reserved  to  any  superstitious  use. 
So  here's  not  a  word  of  glass- windows,  nor  the  images  that  are 
in  them.  Secondly,  that  the  contemporary  practice  (which 
312  is  one  of  the  best  expounders  of  the  meaning  of  any  law)  did 
neither  destroy  all  coloured  windows,  though  images  were  in 

c  in  his  reply.  e  Horn,  of  Idol.  par.  ii.  torn.  ii.  p.  27. 

d  Calv.  i.  Instit.  c.  11.  §  12.     [Op.,      fine.  [pp.  166,  167.  Oxf.  1814.] 
torn.  ix.  p.  22.]  f  3  and  4  Ed.  VI.  c.  10.  [§  2.] 


Die  them  in  the  Queen's  time,  nor  abstain  from  setting  np  of  new, 

both  in  her  and  King  James  his  time.  And  as  the  body  of 
this  statute  is  utterly  mistaken,  so  is  the  penalty  too ;  which 
*  for  the  first  and  second  offence  is  but  a  small  fine ;  and  but 
imprisonment  at  the  King's  will  for  the  third/  "  A  great 
way  short  of  punishment  for  treason.  And  I  could  not  but 
wonder  that  Mr.  Brown  should  be  so  earnest  in  this  point, 
considering  he  is  of  Lincoln's- Inn,  where  Mr.  Pryn's  zeal 
hath  not  yet  beaten  down  the  images  of  the  Apostles  in  the 
fair  windows  of  that  chapel ;  which  windows  also  were  set  up 
new  long  since  that  statute  of  Edward  VI.e  And  'tis  well 
known,  that  I  was  once  resolved  to  have  returned  this  upon 
Mr.  Brown  in  the  House  of  Commons,  but  changed  my  mind, 
lest  thereby  I  might  have  set  some  furious  spirit  on  work  to 
destroy  those  harmless,  goodly  windows ;  to  the  just  dislike 
of  that  worthy  Society." 

But  to  the  statute  Mr.  Brown  added,  f  that  the  destruction 
of  all  images,  as  well  in  windows,  as  elsewhere,  were  con 
demned h  by  the  Homilies  of  the  Church  of  England,  and 
those  Homilies  confirmed  in  the  Articles  of  Religion1,  and  the 
Articles  by  Act  of  Parliament.'  This  was  also  urged  before ; 
and  my  answer  was,  first,  that  though  we  subscribed  generally 
to  the  doctrine  of  the  Homilies,  as  good;  yet  we  did  not 
express,  or  mean  thereby  to  justify  and  maintain  every  parti 
cular  phrase  or  sentence  contained  in  them.  And,  secondly, 
that  the  very  words  of  the  Article  to  which  we  subscribe,  are, 
(  That  the  Homilies  do  contain  a  godly  and  a  wholesome 
doctrine,  and  necessary  for  those  times.'  Godly,  and  whole 
some  for  all  times ;  but  necessary  for  those,  when  people  were 
newly  weaned  from  the  worship  of  images  :  afterwards,  neither 
the  danger,  nor  the  scandal  alike.  "  Mr.  Brown  in  his  reply 
said,  '  that  since  the  doctrine  contained  in  the  Homilie^  was 
wholesome  and  good,  it  must  needs  be  necessary  also  for  all 
times.'  But  this  worthy  gentleman  is  herein  much  mistaken. 
Strong  meat,  as  well  spiritual  as  bodily,  is  good  and  whole 
some;  but  though  it  be  so,  yet  if  it  had  been  'necessary'  at 

£  [Sec  a  description  of  these  win-  h  1.    c  was  commended,'    or    '  com- 

dows  in  Winston  on  Glass  Painting,  mauded.'   [Abp.  Bancroft  suggests  the 

p.  205.     The  figure  of  S.  John   the  omission  of  the  words,  'the  destruc- 

Baptist  was  executed  at  the  expense  tion  of.'] 

of  Attorney-General  Noy,]  J  Art.  35. 


all  times,  and  for  all  men,  the  Apostle  would  never  have  fed  Die 
the  Corinthians  with  milk,  and  not  with  meat  J :  the  meat 
always  good  in  itself,  but  not  necessary  for  them  which  were 
not  able  to  bear  it 1." 

(4.)  The  fourth  thing  which  Dr.  Featly  testifies  is,  'that 
there  were  bowings  at  the  coming  into  the  chapel,  and  going 
up  to  the  communion-table,'  "This  was  usual  in  Queen 
Elizabeth's  time,  and  of  old,  both  among  Jews,  as  appears  in 
the  story  of  Hezekiah,  2  Chro.  xxix.  28  k,  and  among  Chris 
tians,  as  is  evident  in  Rhenanus  his  Notes  upon  Tertullian l : " 
and  one  of  them,  which  have  written  against  the  late  canons, 
confesses  it  was  usual  in  the  Queen's  time ;  but  then  adds, 
'  that  that  was  a  time  of  ignorance  m/  What,  a  time  of  such 
a  reformation,  and  yet  still  a  time  of  ignorance  ?  I  pray  God 
the  opposite  be  not  a  time  of  profaneness,  and  all  is  well. 
"  Mr.  Brown,  in  the  sum  of  his  charge  given  me  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  instanced  in  this  also.  I  answered  as 
before,  with  this  addition,  Shall  I  bow  to  men  in  each  House 
of  Parliament,  and  shall  I  not  bow  to  God  in  His  house, 
313  whither  I  do,  or  ought  to  come  to  worship  (162)  Him  ? 
Surely  I  must  worship  God,  and  bow  to  Him,  though  neither 
altar  nor  communion -table  be  in  the  church." 

(5.)  '  For  organs,  candlesticks,  a  picture  of  a  history  at  the 
back  of  the  altar,  and  copes  at  communions,  and  consecra 
tions/  all  which  Dr.  Featly  named.  First,  these  things  have 
been  in  use  ever  since  the  Reformation.  And  secondly, 
Dr.  Featly  himself  did  twice  acknowledge  that  it  was  in  my 
chapel,  as  it  was  at  White-Hall;  no  difference.  And  it  is  not 
to  be  thought,  that  Queen  Elizabeth  and  King  James  would 
have  endured  them  all  their  time  in  their  own  chapel,  had 
they  been  introductions  for  Popery.  And  for  copes,  they 
are  allowed  at  times  of  communion,  by  the  Canons  of  the 
Church  n.  So  that  these,  all  or  any,  are  very  poor  motives, 
from  whence  to  argue  an  '  alteration  of  religion/ 

1  [The  last  two  paragraphs  were  inserted  in  the  MS.  on  a  separate  sheet.] 

J   1  Cor.  iii.  1,  2.  ceu  in  haram  sues?"] 

k  2  Chron.  xxix.  28.  m  Bp.   Morton  de   Missa,    lib.  vi. 

1   B.  Rhenani  Annot.   in   Tert.  de  cap.   5.     [There   is   an   error  in  this 

Coron.  Mil.  p.  40.  [Franek.  1597.    The  reference,  which  the  Editor  is  unable 

words  alluded  to  seem  to  be,  "  Quis  to  correct.] 

ferat  populum  in  templum  irruentem,  "  Can.  Eccles.  Ang.  24. 


Die  2.  The  second  witness  against  my  chapel  was  Sir  Nath. 

Decimo.  ^rent.  But  he  says  not  so  much  as  Dr.  Featly ;  and  in  what 
he  doth  say,  he  agrees  with  him,  saving  that  he  cannot  say 
whether  the  picture  at  the  back  of  the  communion-table  were 
not  there  before  my  time. 

3.  The  third  witness  for  this  charge,  was  one  Mr.  Bore- 
man  °,  who  came  into  my  chapel  at  prayers  time,  when  I  had 
some  new  plate  to  consecrate  for  use  at  the  communion; 
and  I  think  it  was  brought  to  me  for  that  end  by  Dr.  Featly. 
This  man  says,  first,  '  he  then  saw  me  bow,  and  wear  a  cope/ 
That 's  answered.  Secondly,  '  that  he  saw  me  consecrate 
some  plate ;  that  in  that  consecration,  I  used  some  part  of 
Solomon's  prayer  at  the  dedication  of  the  temple ;  and  that 
in  my  prayer  I  did  desire  God  to  accept  those  vessels/  No 
fault  in  any  of  the  three.  For  in  all  ages  of  the  Church, 
especially  since  Constantino's  time,  that  religion  hath  had 
public  allowance,  there  have  been  consecrations  of  sacred 
vessels,  as  well  as  of  churches  themselves.  And  these  inani 
mate  things  are  holy,  in  that  they  are  deputed  and  dedicated 
to  the  service  of  God  i\  And  we  are  said  '  to  minister  about 
holy  things  V  1  Cor.  ix.  And  '  the  altar '  is  said  '  to  sanctify 
the  giftr,'  S.  Matt,  xxiii.,  which  it  could  not  do,  if  itself  were 
not  holy.  So  then,  if  there  be  no  dedication  of  these  things  to 
God,  no  separation  of  them  from  common  use,  there 's  neither 
1  thing '  nor  '  place '  holy.  And  then  no  '  sacrilege ; '  no 
difference  between  churches  and  common  houses ;  between 
'holy-tables'  (so  the  injunction  calls  them)  and  ordinary 
tables3.  But  I  would  have  no  man  deceive  himself ;  sacri 
lege  is  a  grievous  sin,  and  was  severely  punished  even 
among  the  Heathen.  And  S.  Paul's  question  puts  it  home, 
would  we  consider  of  it,  '  Thou  which  abhorrest  idols,  com- 
mittest  thou  sacrilege i  ?  '  Rom.  ii.  Thou  which  abhorrest 
idols  to  the  very  defacing  of  church  windows,  dost  thou, 
thou  of  all  other,  commit  sacrilege,  which  the  very  wor- 

0  [The   evidence   of  Samuel  Bord-  P  [S.]  Tho.  [Aquin.  Summ.  Theol.] 

man  is  given  in  full  by  Prynne,  Cant.  p.  iii.  q.  Ixiii.  A.  6.  Ad  secuiidum. 

Doom,  p.  65.     A  Samuel  Bourman  q  1  Cor.  ix.  13. 

was  instituted,  July  20,  1641,  to  the  r  S.  Matt,  xxiii.  19. 

Rectory  of  S.  Magnus,  (Newc.  Repert.  s  Injunct.  of  Q.  Eliz.  in  fine.  [Wil- 

vol.i.  p.  399;)  and  as  he  retained  his  kins'  Cone,  tom.iv.  p.  188.] 

living  through  the  whole  of  the  Rebel-  t  Rom.  ii.  22. 
lion,  he  was  probably  the  same  person.] 


shippers  of  idols  punished?     And  this  being  so,  I  hope  my  Die 
use  of  a  part  of  Solomon's  prayer,  or  the  words  of  my  own  •Decimo- 
prayer,  ('  that  God  would  be  pleased  to  accept  them,')  shall 
not  be  reputed  faults. 

But  here  stepped  in  Mr.  Pryn,  and  said,  '  This  was  accord 
ing  to  the  form  in  Missali  Parvo.'1  But  'tis  well  known 
I  borrowed  nothing  thence.  All  that  I  used  was  according 
to  the  copy  of  the  late  Reverend  Bishop  of  Winchester,  Bp. 
Andrews,  which  I  have  by  me  to  be  seenu,  and  which  himself 
used  all  his  time  \ 

314  Then  from  my  chapel,  he  went  to  my  study.  1.  And  II. 
there  the  first  charge  was,  '  that  I  had  a  Bible  with  the  five 
wounds  of  Christ  fair  upon  the  cover  of  it/  This  was 
curiously  wrought  in  needlework.  The  Bible  was  so  sent  me 
by  a  lady,  and  she  a  Protestant ;  I  was  loth  to  deface  the 
work;  but  the  Bible  I  kept  in  my  study  from  any  man's 
hand  or  eye,  that  might  take  offence  at  it.  "Mr.  Brown 
touched  upon  this,  and  my  answer  was  the  same,  saving  that 
I  mentioned  not  the  lady 2.  2.  Secondly,  '  that  I  had  in 
my  study  a  Missal,  and  divers  other  books  belonging  to  the 
Roman  Liturgy.' '  My  Lords,  'tis  true,  I  had  many ;  but 
I  had  more  of  the  Greek  Liturgies  than  the  Roman.  And 
I  had  as  many  of  both  as  I  could  get.  And  I  would  know, 
how  we  shall  answer  their  errors,  if  we  may  not  have  their 
books?  I  had  Liturgies,  all  I  could  get,  both  ancient  and 
modern.  I  had  also  the  Alcoran  in  divers  copies.  If  this  be 
an  argument,  why  do  they  not  accuse  me  to  be  a  Turk  ? 
3.  Thirdly,  to  this  charge  was  added  my  '  Private  Prayer- 
book,  which  Mr.  Pryn  had  taken  from  me  in  his  search.' 
Where  first  I  observed,  That  the  secrets  between  God  and 
my  soul,  were  brought  to  be  divulged  in  open  court.  "  Nihil 
gravius  dicam.  But  see  whether  it  can  be  paralleled  in 
Heathenism."  But  what  Popery  was  found  in  these  (163) 
prayers  ?  1.  Why,  first  they  said,  ( my  prayers  were  in 
canonical  hours,  hora  sexta,  et  hora  nona}  fyc.'  I  enjoined 
myself  several  hours  of  prayer ;  that,  I  hope,  is  no  sin.  And 

1  ['and  which  .  .  ,  time.'  in  margin.] 

2  ['Mr.  Brown  .  .  .  lady.'  on  opposite  page.] 

u  [See  Bp.  Andrewes's  Form  for  Consecrating  Church  Plate,  in  his  Minor 
Works,  p.  159.  Oxf.  1853.] 


Die  if  some  of  them  were  Church  hours,  that 's  no  sin  neither : 

'  Seven  times  a  day  will  I  praise  thee  V  was  the  Prophet 
David's,  long  before  any  canonical  hours.  And  among 
Christians  they  were  in  use  before  Popery  got  any  head. 
God  grant  this  may  be  my  greatest  sin l.  2.  Secondly,  ( the 
prayer  which  I  made  at  the  consecration  of  the  chapel  at 
Hammersmith^/  I  desired  that  might  be  read,  or  any  other. 
No  offence  found.  3.  Thirdly,  the  word  ( prostratus,  in  my 
Private  Devotions,  before  I  came  to  the  Eucharist z.9  If  I  did 
so  to  God,  what 's  that  to  any  man  ?  But,  I  pray,  in  all  this 
curious  search,  ("  and  Mr.  Pryn  here,  and  all  along,  spared  no 
pains,")  why  were  no2  prayers  to  the  B.  Virgin  and  the 
Saints  found,  if  I  were  so  swallowed  up  in  Popery  ? 
III.  From  my  study,  he  went  on  to  my  gallery.  The  Sergeant 
would  find  out  Popery  ere  he  had  done.  Thence  I  was 
charged  with  three  pictures.  1.  '  The  first  of  them  was  a  fair 
picture  of  the  four  Fathers  of  the  Western  Church  :  S.  Am 
brose,  S.  Jerom,  S.  Augustine,  and  S.  Gregory/  It  was  as 
lawful  to  have  this  picture  as  the  picture  of  any  other  men. 
'Yea;  but  there  was  a  dove  pictured  over  them,  and  that 
stood  for  the  Holy  Ghost.'  That 's  more  than  any  witness 
did,  or  durst  depose.  2.  The  second  was,  e  the  Ecce  Homo,  as 
Pilate  brought  Christ  forth,  and  showed  Him  to  the  Jews/ 
This  picture  is  common,  and  I  yet  know  no  hurt  of  it,  so  it 
be  not  worshipped.  And  that  I  detest  as  much  as  any  man, 
and  have  written  as  much  against  it  as  any  Protestant  hath  : 
and  it  was  then  read  in  part a.  And  for  both  these  pictures 
I  answered  farther  out  of  Calvin  b ;  That  it  is  lawful  to  make, 
and  have  the  picture  of  any  things  quorum  sint  capaces 
oculi,  which  may  be  seen.  Now  the  dove  was  visible  and 
seen.  S.  John  i.c  That 's  for  the  first  picture.  And  for  the 
second,  the  Ecce  Homo ;  why  did  Pilate  say  Ecce,  but  that  the  315 
Jews  might  and  did  see  Him?  S.  Joh.  xix.d  So  both  pic 
tures  lawful  by  the  rule  laid  down  by  Calvin. 

'  God  grant  .  .  .  sin.'  in  margin.] 
'  why  were  no'  originally  '  were  no  '] 

*  Psal.  cxix.  [164.]  b  Lib.  i.  Inst.  cap.  11.  §  12.   [Op., 

y  [See  Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  96.]  torn.  ix.  p.  22.] 

z  [Ibid.  p.  74.]  c  g.  John  i.  32,  33. 

8  [Cont.  Fisher,  §  33.  p.  279.  [Edit.  d  S.  John  xix.  5. 
1639;  pp.  310—312,  Oxf.  1849.] 


<f  Mr.  Brown  charged  against  both  these  pictures  very  Die 
warmly.  And  when  I  had  answered  as  before,  in  his  reply  Decimo- 
he  fell  upon  my  answer ;  and  said  it  was  in  the  Homilies  (but 
either  he  quoted  not  the  place,  or  I  else  slipped  it),  '  That 
every  picture  of  Christ  was  a  lie,  becaus.e  whole  Christ  cannot 
be  pictured/  But  by  this  argument  it  is  unlawful  to  picture 
any  man  :  for  the  whole  man  cannot  be  pictured.  Who  ever 
drew  a  picture  of  the  soul?  And  yet  who  so  simple  as  to 
say  the  picture  of  a  man  is  a  lie  ?  Besides,  the  Ecce  Homo  is 
a  picture  of  the  humanity  of  Christ  only,  which  may  as  law 
fully  be  drawn  as  any  other  man.  And  it  may  be  I  may 
give  further  answer,  when  I  see  the  place  in  the  Homilies." 

3.  The  third  picture  found  in  my  gallery,  I  marvel  why 
it  was  produced.  For  it  relates  to  that  of  our  Saviour, 
S.  John  x.,  where  He  says,  c  that  the  shepherd  enters  into 
the  sheepfold  by  the  door,  but  they  which  climb  up  to  enter 
another  way,  are  thieves  and  robbers e.'  And  in  that  picture 
the  Pope  and  the  friars  are  climbing  up  to  get  in  at  the 
windows.  So  'tis  as  directly  against  Popery  as  can  be. 
Besides,  it  was  witnessed  before  the  Lords  by  Mr.  Walter 
Dobson,  an  ancient  servant,  both  to  Archbishop  Bancroft  and 
Abbot,  that  both  the  Ecce  Homo  and  this  picture  were  in  the 
gallery  when  he  came  first  to  Lambeth-House,  which  was 
about  forty  years  since.  So  it  was  not  brought  thither  by 
me  to  countenance  Popery f.  And  I  hope  your  Lps.  do  not 
think  me  such  a  fool,  if  I  had  an  intention, to  alter  religion, 
I  would  hang  the  profession  of  it  openly  in  my  gallery, 
thereby  to  bring  present  danger  upon  myself,  and  destroy 
the  work  which  themselves  say  I  intended  cunningly.  And 
if  there  be  any  error  in  having  and  keeping  such  pictures, 
yet  that  is  no  sufficient  proof,  that  I  had  any  intention  to 
alter  the  religion  established,  which  I  desire  may  be  taken 
notice  of  once  for  all. 

From  my  gallery  the  Sergeant  crossed  the  water  to  White-    IV. 
Hall  (and  sure  in  haste,  for  at  that  time  he  took  no  leave  of 

e  S.  John  x.  1,  2.  as  were  the  windows  of  the  chapel, 

f  All  these  pictures  were  placed  in  and  the  chapel  itself  converted  to  a 

the  gallery  by  Cardinal  Pole,  when  he  dancing-room   by  them,  having  first 

built    it,    and    continue   there   still,  beat  down  Archbishop  Parker's  tomb 

having  not  been  defaced  by  the  godly  in  the  middle  of  it,  and  cast  his  bones 

party  in  the  time  of  the  Rebellion,  upon  the  dunghill. — H.  W. 


Die  Captain  Guest  e,  or  his  wife,  before  he  left  Lambeth).     At 

Decimo.      the  Court  he  met  gir  Henr  Mildmayh.     This  (164)  knight 

being  produced  by  him  against  me,  says,  '  that  in  my  time  bow 
ings  were  constantly  used  in  the  chapel  there/  1.  But  first, 
Dr.  Featly  told  your  Lps.,  there  was  nothing  in  my  chapel 
but  as  it  was  in  use  at  White-Hall.  So  all  the  Popery  I  could 
bring,  was  there  before.  And  secondly,  If  bowing  to  God  in 
His  own  house  be  not  amiss,  (as  how  it  should  I  yet  know 
not,)  then  there  can  be  no  fault  in  the  constant  doing  of  it : 
Quod  semel  fecisse  bonum  est,  non  potest  malum  esse  si  fre 
quenter  fiati.  So  St.  Jerome  teaches.  Thirdly,  I  am  very 
sorry,  that  any  reverence  to  God,  in  His  house,  and  in  the 
time  of  His  worship,  should  be  thought  too  much.  I  am 
sure  the  Homilies,  so  often  pressed  against  me,  cry  out 
against  the  neglect  of  reverence  in  the  church k.  This 
passage  was  read,  and  by  this  it  seems,  the  devil's  cunning 
was,  so  soon  as  he  saw  superstition  thrust  out  of  this  Church,  316 
to  bring  irreverence  and  profaneness  in.  "  Here  Mr.  Browne 
having  pressed  this  charge,  replies  upon  me  in  his  last, 
'that  I  would  admit  no  mean,  but  either  there  must  be 
superstition  or  profaneness ;'  whereas  my  words  can  infer  no 
such  thing.  I  said  this  was  the  devil's  practice.  I  would 
have  brought  in  the  mean  between  them,  and  preserved  it 
too,  by  God's  blessing,  had  I  been  let  alone." 

2.  Sir  Henry  says  next,  ( that  he  knew  of  no  bowings  in 
that  chapel  befpre  my  time,  but  by  the  Eight  Honourable 
the  Knights  of  the  Garter  at  their  solemnity/  No  time  else  ? 
Did  he  never  see  the  King  his  M.  offer  before  my  time  ?  Or 
did  he  ever  see  him  offer,  or  the  Ld.  Chamberlain  attend 
him  there,  without  bowing  and  kneeling  too  ?  And  for  the 
Knights  of  the  Garter,  if  they  might  do  it  without  supersti 
tion,  I  hope  I  and  other  men  might  do  so  too.  Especially 
since  they  were  ordered'  by  Hen.  V.  to  do  it  with  great 
reverence,  ad  modum  sacerdotum  *.  Which  proves  the  anti 
quity  of  this  ceremony  in  England. 

*    [Guest  was  then    in   charge   of  [Sect.  10.  Op.,  torn.  ii.  col.  396  D.] 
Lambeth.     See  Diary,  VM ay  9,  1643,          k  Tom.  ii.    Horn.  i.    Princip.    [i.e. 

Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  251.]  The  Homily  of  the  Right  Use  of  the 

h    [See   Sir  Henry  Mildmay's  evi-  Church.] 

dence   at.  length  in   Prynne's   Cant.          J   In  Registro  Windesoriensi,  p.  65. 
Doom,  p.  67.]  'Tis  commonly  called  the  Black  Book. 

1  S.  Hieron.  adversus  Vigilantium.      [The  origin  of  this  order  of  Henry  V. 


3.  He  further  says,  '  there  was  a  fair  crucifix  in  a  piece  of  Die 
hangings  hung  up  behind  the  altar,  which  he  thinks,  was  not  •Decimo- 
used  before  my  time/  But  that  '  he  thinks  so '  is  no  proof. 
4.  He  says,  'this  fair  piece  was  hanged  up  in  the  Passion 
Week,  as  they  call  it/  As  they  call  it?  Which  they?  Will 
he  shut  out  himself  from  the  Passion  Week  ?  All  Christians 
have  called  it  so  for  above  a  thousand  years  together  m ;  and 
is  that  become  an  innovation  too  ?  As  they  call  it.  5.  He 
says,  '  The  hanging  up  of  this  piece  was  a  great  scandal  to 
men  but  indifferently  affected  to  religion.'  Here  I  humbly 
crave  leave  to  observe  some  few  particulars  :  1.  First,  that 
here 's  no  proof  so  much  as  offered,  that  the  piece  was  hung 
up  by  me  or  my  command.  2.  Secondly,  that  this  gentleman 
came  often  to  me  to  Lambeth,  and  professed  much  love  to 
me,  yet  was  never  the  man  that  told  me  his  conscience,  or 
any  man's  else,  was  troubled  at  it ;  which  had  he  done,  that 
should  have  been  a  scandal  to  no  man.  3.  Thirdly,  that  if 
this  were  scandalous  to  any,  it  must  be  offensive  in  regard  of 
the  workmanship ;  or  quatenus  tale,  as  it  was  a  crucifix.  Not 
in  regard  of  the  work  certainly,  for  that  was  very  exact.  And 
then  if  it  were  because  it  was  a  crucifix,  why  did  not  the  old 
one  offend  Sir  Henry's  conscience  as  much  as  the  new?  For 
the  piece  of  hangings  which  hung  constantly  all  the  year  at 
the  back  of  the  altar,  thirty  years  together  upon  my  own 
knowledge,  and  somewhat  above,  long  before,  (as  I  offered 
proof  by  the  vestry  men,)  and  so  all  the  time  of  Sir  Henry's 
being  in  court,  had  *  a  crucifix  wrought  in  it,  and  yet  his 
conscience  never  troubled  at  it.  4.  Fourthly,  that  he  could 
not  possibly  think  that  I  intended  any  Popery  in  it,  con 
sidering  how  hateful  he  knew  me  to  be  at  Rome,  beyond  any 
my  predecessors  since  the  Reformation.  For  so  he  protested 
at  his  return  from  thence  to  myself.  And  I  humbly  desire  a 
1  ['and  so  .  .  .  had'  in  margin.  Originally  ' there  was '] 

is  given  by  the  Archbishop  in  his  Queen  Mary.  It  appears,  also,  from  the 

speech   at  the  censure  of  Bastwick,  account  of  the  ceremonies  observed  at 

p.    79    in    marg.     (Works,    vol.  vi.)  the  Installation  of  the  Duke  of  Cum- 

Heylin  mentions   (Hist,  of  the  Ke-  berland,  in  1730,  that  these  ceremo- 

formation,  pp.  123,  124)  that  Queen  nies  were  still  observed  at  that  time. 

Elizabeth  retained  the  ancient  cere-  See  Hierurg.  Angl.  pp.  51,  60—62.] 

monies  observed  by  the  Knights  of  m  Et  observabatur  ab  omnibus.  Ve- 

the  Garter  in  their  adoration  towards  delius  (and  he  no  way  superstitious) 

the  altar,  which  were  abolished   by  in  Igna.  Epistola  ad  Philip.  Exercit. 

King  Edward  VI.,    and    revived   by  [§]  xvi.  cap.  3.  [p.  64.  Genev.  1623.] 


Die  salvo,  that  I  may  have  him  called  to  witness  it.     Which  was 

Decimo-     granted. 

When  they  had  charged  me  thus  far,  there  came  up  a 
message  from  the  House  of  Commons.  I  was  commanded 
to  withdraw.  But  that  business  requiring  more  haste,  I  was 
dismissed  with  a  command  to  attend  again  on  Wednesday, 

Mail  22.     May  22.     But  then  I  was  put  off  again  to  Monday,  May  27. 

Man  27.     And  after  much  pressing  for  some  (165)  maintenance,  con 
sidering   how  oft  I  was  made    attend,  and  with    no  small 

Mail  25.     expense,  on  May  25,  I  had  an  order  from  the  Committee  of 

Sequestrations,  to  have  two  hundred  pound  allowed  me  out  317 
of  my  own  now  sequestered  estate.     It  was  a  month  before 
I  could  receive  this.     And  this  was  all  that  ever  was  yet 
allowed  me,  since  the  sequestration  of  my  estate,  being  then 
of  above  two  years'  continuance. 




Tins  day  Mr.  Sergeant  Wilde  followed  the  charge  upon  I. 
me.  And  went  back  again  to  my  chapel  windows  at  Lam-  Mail  27, 
beth.  Three  witnesses  against  them.  1.  The  first  was  one  Monday 
Pember,  a  glazier.  He  says,  '  there  was  in  one  of  the  glass  Die  < 
windows  on  the  north  side,  the  picture  of  an  old  man  with  a 
glory,  which  he  thinks  was  of  God  the  Father/  But  his 
thinking  so  is  no  proof.  Nor  doth  he  express  in  which  of 
the  north  windows  he  saw  it.  And  for  the  glory,  that  is 
usual  about  the  head  of  every  saint.  2.  And  Mr.  Brown, 
who  was  the  second  witness,  and  was  trusted  by  me  for  all 
the  work  of  the  windows,  both  at  Lambeth  and  l  Croydon, 
says  expressly  upon  his  oath,  that  there  was  no  picture  of 
God  the  Father  in  the  windows  at  Lambeth.  But  he  says, 
'  he  found  a  picture  of  God  the  Father  in  a  window  at 
Croydon,  and  Archbp.  Cranmer's  arms  under  it,  and  that 
he  pulled  it  down/  So  it  appears  this  picture  was  there 
before  my  time ;  and  continued  there  in  so  zealous  an  Arch 
bishop's  time  as  Cranmer a  was  well  known  to  be,  and  it  was 
pulled  down  in  my  time.  Neither  did  I  know  till  now,  that 
ever  such  a  picture  was  there  ;  and  the  witness  deposes,  '  he 
never  made  me  acquainted  with  it/  3.  The  third  witness  was 
Mr.  Pryn.  He  says,  '  he  had  taken  a  survey  of  the  windows 
at  Lambeth/  And  I  doubt  not  his  diligence.  He  repeated 
the  story  in  each  window.  I  have  told  this  before,  and  shall 
not  repeat  it b.  He  says,  '  the  pictures  of  these  stories  are  in 
the  Mass-book/  If  it  be  so,  yet  they  were  not  taken  thence 
by  me.  Archbishop  Morton c  did  that  work,  as  appears  by 
his  device  in  the  windows.  He  says,  fthe  story  of  the  day 
1  ['at  Lambeth  and'  originally  'at  home  and'] 

a  [Abp.  of  Cant.  1533—1555.]  e  [Abp.  of  Cant.  1486—1500.] 

>'  [See  above,  p.  199.] 

LAUD. — VOL.    IV.  P 


Die  of  judgment  was  in  a  window  in  atrio,  that  must  not  come 

mo>  into  the  chapel/  Good  Ld.,  whither  will  malice  carry  a  man? 
The  story  opposite  is  of  the  creation ;  and  what,  must  not 
that  come  into  the  chapel  neither?  The  chapel  is  divided 
into  an  inner  and  outer  chapel.  In  this  outward  the  two 
windows  mentioned  are.  And  the  partition  or  screen  of  the 
chapel,  which  makes  it  two,  was  just  in  the  same  place  where 
now  it  stands,  from  the  very  building  of  the  chapel,  for 
aught  can  be  proved  to  the  contrary.  So  neither  I  nor  any 
man  else  did  shut  out l  the  day  of  judgment.  He  says, 
'I  had  read  the  Mass-book  diligently/  How  else  should 
I  be  able  really  to  confute  what  is  amiss  in  it  ?  He  says, 
'  I  had  also  a  book  of  pictures  concerning  the  life  of  Christ 
in  my  study  V  And  it  was  fit  for  me  to  have  it.  For  some  318 
things  are  to  be  seen  in  their  pictures  for  the  people,  which 
their  writings  do  not,  perhaps  dare  not,  avow 2. 
II.  The  second  charge  of  this  day,  was  about  the  admini 
stration  of  the  Sacrament  in  my  chapel.  The  witnesses  two. 
1.  The  first  was  Dr.  Hay  wood6,  who  had  been  my  chaplain 
in  the  house.  They  had  got  from  others  the  ceremonies 
there  used;  and  then  brought  him  upon  oath.  '  He  confessed 
he  administered  in  a  cope/  And  the  Canon  warranted  it f. 
He  confesses,  (as  it  was  urged,)  f  that  he  fetched  the  elements 
from  the  credential  (a  little  side-table  as  they  called  it),  and 
set  them  reverently  upon  the  communion-table/  Where  's 
the  offence  ?  For  first,  the  communion-table  was  little,  and 
there  was  hardly  room  for  the  elements  to  stand  con 
veniently  there,  while  the  service  was  in  administration. 
And  secondly,  I  did  not  this  without  example ;  for  both 
Bishop  Andrews  and  some  other  bishops  used  it  so  all  their 
time,  and  no  exception  taken  e.  The  second  witness  was 
Rob.  Cornwall h,  one  of  my  menial  servants.  A  very  forward 

1  ['neither  I  ...  out'  in  margin.     Originally, '  the  day  of  judgment  I  did 
not  shut  out,  nor  any  man  else.']  2  ['avow.'  orig.  written  'deny.'] 

d  [The  title  of  the  book  as  given  given  an  account  of  his  superstitious 

by  Prynne  (Cant.  Doom,   p.  66)  was,  and  idolatrous  manner  of  administer- 

'  Imagines  Vitse,  Passionis  et  Mortis  ing  the  Lord's  Supper.     (Wood,  Ath. 

D.  N.   Jesu   Christ!.'     By  Boetius  a  Ox.  iii.  634,635.)] 
Bolswert,  1623.]  {  Can.  Eccles.  Ang.  24. 

e  [William  Heywood,  Rector  of  S.          «  [On  the  use  of  the  Credence-table, 

Giles-in-the-Fields,  and  Preb.  of  West-  see  Hickes's  Pref.  Discourse,  sect.  v. 

minster.      Articles    were     exhibited  pp.  128 — 130.] 
against   him   in   1641,  in   which    is          h  [Prynne  calls  him  'Cordwell.'] 


witness  he  showed  himself.     But  said  no  more  than  is  said  Die 
and  answered  before.     Both  of  them  confessing  that  I  was 
sometimes  present. 

The  third  charge  was  about  the  ceremonies  at  the  coro-  III. 
nation  of  his  Majesty.  1.  And  first  out  of  my  Diary,  Feb.  2, 
1625,  'tis  urged,  '  that  I  carried  back  the  regalia,  offered 
them  on  the  altar,  and  then  laid  them  up  in  their  place  of 
safety1.'  I  bare  the  place  at  the  coronation  of  the  (166) 
Dean  of  Westminster  J,  and  I  was  to  look  to  all  those  things, 
and  their  safe  return  into  custody,  by  the  place  I  then 
executed.  And  the  offering  of  them  could  be  no  offence. 
For  the  King  himself  offers  upon  solemn  days.  And  the 
right  honourable  the  Knights  of  the  Garter  offer  at  their 
solemnity.  And  the  offertory  is  established  by  law  in  the 
Common  Prayer-book  of  this  Church.  And  the  preben 
daries  assured  me  it  was  the  custom  for  the  Dean  so  to  do. 
2.  Secondly,  they  charged  a  marginal  note  in  the  book  upon 
me :  '  That  the  unction  was  in  forma  crucis.'  That  note 
doth  not  say  that  it  ought  so  to  be  done ;  but  it  only  relates 
the  practice,  what  was  done.  And  if  any  fault  were  in 
anointing  the  King  in  that  form,  it  was  my  predecessor's 
fault,  not  mine,  for  he  so  anointed  him.  3.  They  say,  '  there 
was  a  crucifix  among  the  regalia,  and  that  it  stood  upon  the 
altar  at  the  coronation,  and  that  I  did  not  except  against 
it  V  My  predecessor  executed  at  that  time.  And  I  believe 
would  have  excepted  against  the  crucifix  had  it  stood  there. 
But  I  remember  not  any  there.  Yet  if  there  were,  if  my 
predecessor  approved  the  standing  of  it,  or  were  content  to 
connive  at  it,  it  would  have  been  made  but  a  scorn  had 
I  quarrelled  it.  4.  They  say,  '  one  of  the  prayers  was  taken 
out  of  the  Pontifical/  And  I  say,  if  it  were,  it  was  not  taken 
thence  by  me.  And  the  prayers  are  the  same  that  were  used 
at  King  James  his  coronation.  And  so  the  prayer  be  good 
(and  here 's  no  word  in  it,  that  is  excepted  against),  'tis  no 
matter  whence  'tis  taken. 

5.  Then  leaving  the  ceremonies,  he  charged  me  with  two 

1  [See  Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  181.]  Life  of  Laud,  p.  144.  [This  crucifix 

J  [Ibid.  p.  178,  note0.]  is  mentioned  among  the  Regalia,  in 

k  Heylin  affirmeth,  that  the  old  an  Indenture  between  Bp.  Andrewes 

crucifix,  being  found  among  the  re-  and  Dr.  Neile,  Dean  of  Westminster. 

galia,  was  then  placed  upon  the  altar.  MSS.  Ashmole,  Numb.  837.  Art.  xlii.] 



Die  alterations   in  the  body  of  the  King's  oath.     One  added, 

mo'  namely  these  words,  '  agreeable  to  the  King's  prerogative.' 
The  other  omitted,  namely  these  words,  qua  populus  elege- 
rit,  '  which  the  people  have  chosen,  or  shall  choose.'  For  this 
latter,  the  clause  omitted,  that  suddenly  vanished.  For  it  319 
was  omitted  in  the  oath  of  King  James,  as  is  confessed  by 
themselves  in  the  printed  votes  of  this  present  Parliament ]. 
But  the  other  highly  insisted  on,  '  as  taking  off  the  total 
assurance  which  the  subjects  have  by  the  oath  of  their 
prince  for  the  performance  of  his  laws.'  First,  I  humbly 
conceive  this  clause  takes  off  none  of  the  people's  assurance ; 
none  at  all l.  For  the  King's  just  and  legal  prerogative,  and 
the  subject's  assurance  for  liberty  and  property,  may  stand 
well  together,  and  have  so  stood  for  hundreds  of  years. 
Secondly,  that  alteration,  whatever  it  be,  was  not  made  by 
me ;  nor  is  there  any  interlining  or  alteration  so  much  as  of 
a  letter  found  in  that  book.  Thirdly,  if  anything  be  amiss 
therein,  my  predecessor  gave  that  oath  to  the  King,  and 
not  I.  I  was  merely  ministerial,  both  in  the  preparation, 
and  at  the  coronation  itself,  supplying  the  place  of  the  Dean 
of  Westminster. 

After  this  day's  work  was  ended,  it  instantly  spread  all 
over  the  city,  that  I  had  altered  the  King's  oath  at  his  coro 
nation,  and  from  thence  into  all  parts  of  the  kingdom ;  as  if 
all  must  be  true  which  was  said  at  the  bar  against  me,  what 
answer  soever  I  made.  The  people  and  some  of  the  Synod 
now  crying  out,  that  this  one  thing  was  enough  to  take  away 
my  life.  And  though  this  was  all  that  was  charged  this  day 
concerning  this  oath,  yet  seeing  how  this  fire  took,  I  thought 
fit,  the  next  day  that  I  came  to  the  bar,  to  desire  that  the 
books  of  the  coronation  of  former  kings,  especially  those  of 
Queen  Elizabeth  and  King  James,  might  be  seen  and  com 
pared,  and  the  copies  brought  into  the  court,  both  from  the 
Exchequer,  and  such  as  were  in  my  study  at  Lambeth :  and 
a  fuller  inquisition  made  into  the  business :  in  regard  I  was 
as  innocent  from  this  crime,  as  when  my  mother  bare  me 
into  the  world.  A  salvo  was  entered  for  me  upon  this.  And 
1  [The  words,  '  First,  because,'  here  followed  in  MS.,  but  are  erased.] 

1  [Husband's  Exact  Collection,  &c.]  Lords  and  Commons  assembled  in 
p.  706.  [Lond.  1643.  The  document  Parliament,  in  reply  to  his  Majesty's 
referred  to,  is  the  Declaration  of  the  answer  to  the  Remonstrance.] 


every  day  that  I  after  came  to  the  bar,  I  called  upon  this  Die 
business.  But  somewhat  or  other  was  still  pretended  by  U 
them  which  managed  the  evidence,  that  I  could  not  get  the 
books  to  be  brought  forth,  nor  anything  to  be  done,  till 
almost  the  last  day  of  my  hearing.  Then  no  books  could  be 
found  in  the  Exchequer,  nor  in  my  study,  but  only  that  of 
King  James ;  whereas,  when  the  keys  were  taken  from  me, 
there  were  divers  books  there,  as  is  confessed  in  the  printed 
votes  of  this  Parliament m :  and  one  of  them  with  a  watchet 
satin  cover,  now  missing.  And  whether  this  of  King  James 
(had  not  my  secretary,  who  knew  (167)  the  book,  seen  it 
drop  out  of  Mr.  Pryn's  bag)  would  not  have  been  concealed 
too,  I  cannot  tell.  At  last,  the  book  of  King  James  his 
coronation,  and  the  other  urged  against  me  concerning  King 
Charles,  were  seen  and  compared  openly  in  the  Lds/  House, 
and  found  to  be  the  same  oath  in  both,  and  no  interlining  or 
alteration  in  the  book  charged  against  me. 

t(  This  business  was  left  by  the  Sergeant  to  Mr.  Maynard, 
who  made  the  most  that  could  be  out  of  my  Diary  against 
me.  And  so  did  Mr.  Brown,  when  he  came  to  give  the  sum 
of  the  charge  against  me,  both  before  the  Lds.,  and  after  in 
the  House  of  Commons.  And  therefore,  for  the  avoiding  of 
all  tedious  repetition;  and  for  that  the  arguments  which 
both  used,  are  the  same ;  and  because  I  hold  it  not  fit  to 
break  a  charge  of  this  moment  into  divers  pieces,  or  put 
320  them  in  different  places,  I  will  here  set  down  the  whole 
business  together,  and  the  answer  which  I  then  gave. 

"  Mr.  Brown,  in  the  sum  of  the  charge  against  me  in 
the  Commons-house,  when  he  came  to  this  article,  said,  '  he 
was  now  come  to  the  business  so  much  expected/  And  I 
humbly  besought  that  honourable  House,  if  it  were  a  matter 
of  so  great  expectation,  it  might  be  of  as  great  attention  too, 
while  I  should  follow  that  worthy  gentleman,  step  after  step, 
and  answer  as  I  went 

"  1.  And  first,  he  went  about  to  prove  out  of  my  Diary, 
that  this  addition  ('  of  the  King's  prerogative ')  to  the  oath, 
was  made  by  me  l.     Thus  he  says,  that  '  Decemb.  31,  1625, 
I  went  to  Hampton-Court  V     That's  true.     He  says,  '  that 
1  [The  words,  '  out  of  my  Diary.'  were  originally  at  the  end  of  the  sentence.] 
m  P.  706.  n  [See  Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  176.] 


Die  there,  Januar.  1,  I  understood  I  was  named  with  other  Bps., 

mo'  to  meet  and  consider  of  the  ceremonies  about  the  corona 
tion0;  and  that,  Januar.  4,  we  did  meet  at  White-Hall 
accordingly?;  and  that,  Januar.  6,  we  gave  his  Majesty  an 
answer  V  Not  I  (as  'twas  charged),  but  we,  gave  his  Majesty 
answer.  So  if  the  oath  had  been  changed  by  me,  it  must 
have  been  known  to  the  committee,  and  broken  forth  to 
my  ruin  long  since.  Then  he  says,  '  that  Januar.  16,  I  was 
appointed  to  serve  at  the  coronation,  in  the  room  of  the 
Dean  of  Westminster1'/  That's  no  crime.  And  'tis  added 
in  the  Diary,  that  this  charge  was  delivered  unto  me  by  my 
predecessor.  So  he  knew  that  this  service  to  attend  at  the 
coronation  was  imposed  upon  me.  He  says  next,  'that 
Januar.  18,  the  Duke  of  Buckingham  had  me  to  the  King, 
to  show  his  Majesty  the  notes  we  had  agreed  on,  if  nothing 
offended  him  s.'  These  were  only  notes  of  the  ceremonies. 
And  the  other  bishops  sent  me,  being  puny,  to  give  the 
account.  Then  he  says,  '  Januar.  23,  it  is  in  my  Diary, 
Librum  habui  paratum,  I  had  a  book  ready.'  And  it  was 
time,  after  such  meetings;  and  the  coronation  being  to 
follow  Feb.  2,  and  I  designed  to  assist  and  attend  that 
service,  that  I  should  have  a  book  ready  *.  The  ceremonies 
were  too  long  and  various  to  carry  them  in  memory.  And 
whereas  'tis  urged,  '  that  I  prepared  and  altered  this  book ;' 
the  words  in  my  Diary  are  only,  paratum  habui,  I  had  the 
book  ready  for  my  own  use  in  that  service.  Nor  can  para 
tum  habui,  signify  preparing  or  altering  the  book.  And 
•  thirdly,  'tis  added  there,  that  the  book  which  I  had  ready  in 
my  hands,  did  agree  per  omnia  cum  libro  regali :  and  if  it 
did  agree  in  all  things  with  the  King's  recorded  book  then 
brought  out  of  the  Exchequer,  where  then  is  the  alteration 
so  laboriously  sought  to  be  fastened  on  me  ?  I  humbly 
beseech  you  to  mark  this. 

"Yet  out  of  these  premises  put  together,  Mr.  Brown's 
inference  was,  '  that  I  made  this  alteration  of  the  oath.'  But 
surely  these  premises,  neither  single  nor  together,  can  pro 
duce  any  such  conclusion;  but  rather  the  contrary.  Beside, 
inference  upon  evidence  is  not  evidence,  unless  it  be  abso- 

0  [See  Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  176.1  r  [Ibid.] 

*  [Ibid.  p.  177.]  •  [Ibid.  p.  179.] 

1  [Ibid.  p.  178.]  '  [Ibid.] 


lutely  necessary;  which  all  men  see  that  here  it  is  not.  But  Die 
1  pray  observe1.  Why  was  such  a  sudden  stay  made  at 
Januar.  23  ?  whereas  it  appears  in  my  Diary  at  Januar.  31, 
that  the  Bps.  were  not  alone  trusted  with  this  coronation 
business ;  sed  alii  procereSj  '  but  other  great  and  noble  men 
also11/  And  they  did  meet  that  Januar.  31,  and  sat  in 
Council  about  it.  So  the  Bishops'  meetings  were  but  prepa- 
321  ratory  to  ease  the  Lords, — most  of  the  ceremonies  being  in 
the  church-way.  And  then  can  any  man  think,  that  these 
great  Lords,  when  they  came  to  review  all  that  was  done, 
would  let  the  oath  be  altered  by  me  or  any  other,  so  mate 
rially,  and  not  check  at  it?  (168)  ;Tis  impossible. 

"  2.  Secondly,  this  gentleman  went  on  to  charge  this 
addition  upon  me,  thus,— '  There  were  found  in  my  study  at 
Lambeth  two  books  of  King  James  his  coronation;  one  of 
them  had  this  clause  or  addition  in  it,  and  the  other  had  it 
not2;  and  we  cannot  tell  by  which  he  was  crowned;  there 
fore,  it  must  needs  be  some  wilful  error  in  me,  to  make 
choice  of  that  book  which  had  this  addition  in  it ;  or  some 
great  mistake/  First,  if  it  were  a  mistake  only,  then  it  is  no 
crime.  And  wilful  error  it  could  not  be ;  for,  being  named 
one  of  them  that  were  to  consider  of  the  ceremonies,  I  went 
to  my  predecessor,  and  desired  a  book,  to  see  by  it  what  was 
formerly  done.  He  delivered  to  me  this  now  in  question. 
I  knew  not  whether  he  had  more  or  no,  nor  did  I  know  that 
any  one  of  them  differed  from  other.  Therefore,  no  wilful 
error.  For  I  had  no  choice  to  make  of  this  book3  which  had 
the  addition,  before  that  which  had  it  not,  but  thankfully 
took  that  which  he  gave  me.  But,  secondly,  if  one  book  of 
K.  James  his  coronation,  in  which  I  could  have  no  hand,  had 
this  addition  in  it,  (as  is  confessed,)  then  was  not  this  a  new 
addition  of  my  making.  And,  thirdly,  it  may  easily  be  seen 
that  K.  James  was  crowned  by  the  book  which  hath  this 
addition  in  it,  this  being  in  a  fair  carnation  satin  cover,  the 
other  in  paper  without  a  cover,  and  unfit  for  a  king's  hand, 
especially  in  such  a  great  and  public  solemnity. 

"  3.  In  the  third  place  he  said,  '  there  were  in  this  book 

'  But  I  pray  observe.'  in  margin.     Originally,  'Besides.'] 
and  .  .  .  not;'  in  margin.]  3  ['book'  in  margin.] 

u  [See  Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  180.] 


We  twenty  alterations  more,  and  all,  or  most,  in  my  hand/     Be 

'  it  so,  (for  I  was  never  suffered  to  have  the  book  to  consider 
of,)  they  are  confessed  not  to  be  material.  The  truth  is, 
when  we  met  in  the  committee,  we  were  fain  to  mend  many 
slips  of  the  pen,  to  make  sense  in  some  places,  and  good 
English  in  other.  And  the  book  being  trusted  with  me, 
I  had  reason  to  do  it  with  my  own  hand,  but  openly  at  the 
committee  all.  Yet  two  things,  as  matters  of  some  moment, 
Mr.  Brown  checked  at. 

"  1.  The  one  was,  '  that  confirm  is  changed  into  perform.' 
If  it  be  so,  perform  is  the  greater  and  more  advantageous 
to  the  subject,  because  it  includes  execution,  which  the  other 
word  doth  not.  Nor  doth  this  word  hinder,  'but  that  the 
laws  and  liberties  are  the  people's  already/  For  though  they 
be  their  own,  yet  the  King,  by  his  place,  may  and  ought  to 
perform  the  keeping  and  maintaining  of  them.  I  say,  s  if  it 
be  so,'  for  I  was  never  suffered  to  have  this  book  in  my 
hands,  thoroughly  to  peruse.  Nor,  under  favour,  do  I  be 
lieve  this  alteration  is  so  made,  as  His  urged.  In  the  book 
which  I  have  by  me,  and  was  transcribed  from  the  other,  it 
is  confirm1. 

"  2.  The  other  is,  '  that  the  King  is  said  to  answer,  I  will, 
for  /  do.'  But  when  will  he  ?  Why,  all  the  days  of  his  life  ; 
which  is  much  more  than  '  I  do '  for  the  present.  So,  if  this 
change  be  made,  'tis  still  for  the  people's  advantage.  And 
there  also  'tis,  'I  do  grant2.'  And  yet  again  I  say  f  if,'  for 
the  reason  before  given.  Besides,  in  all  the  Latin  copies, 
there  is  a  latitude  left  for  them  that  are  trusted,  to  add  to 
those  interrogatories  which  are  then  put  to  the  King  any 
other  that  is  just :  in  these  words,  Adjiciantur  prcedictis  inter-  322 
rogationibus  qua  justa  fuerint.  And  such  are  these  two 
mentioned,  if  they  were  made. 

"  4.  Mr.  Brown's  fourth  and  last  objection  was,  that  I 
made  this  alteration  of  the  oath,  '  because  it  agrees,'  as  he 
said,  '  with  my  judgment ;  for  that  in  a  paper  of  Bishop 
Harsnett's,  there  is  a  marginal  note  in  my  hand,  that  salvo 
jure  corona  is  understood  in  the  oaths  of  a  king.'  But,  first, 

1  ['  In  the  .  .  .  confirm.'  in  margin.] 

2  •  ['  And  .  .  .  grant.'  in  margin.     By  the  side,  in  the  text,  are  three  lines 
"    erased. 1 


there 's  a  great  deal  of  difference  between  jus  Regis  et  praroga-  Die 
tiva,  between  'the  right  and  inheritance  of  the  King,  and  his 
prerogative,  though  never  so  legal.  And  with  submission,  arid 
until  I  shall  be  convinced  herein,  I  must  believe  that  no  King 
can  swear  himself  out  of  his  native  right.  Secondly,  if  this 
were,  and  still  be,  an  error  in  my  judgment,  that 's  no  argument 
at  all  to  prove  malice  in  my  will :  that,  because  that  is  my 
judgment  for  jus  Regis,  therefore  I  must  thrust  praroga- 
tivam  Regis,  which  (169)  is  not  my  judgment,  into  a  public 
oath  which  I  had  no  power  to  alter.  These  were  all  the 
proofs  which  Mr.  Maynard  at  first,  and  Mr.  Brown  at  last, 
brought  against  me  in  this  particular ;  and  they  are  all  but 
conjectural,  and  the  conjectures  weak.  But  that  I  did  not 
alter  this  oath  by  adding  the  prerogative,  the  proofs  I  shall 
bring  are  pregnant,  and  some  of  them  necessary.  They  are 
these  : — 

"  1 .  My  predecessor  was  one  of  the  grand  committee  for 
these  ceremonies.  That  was  proved  by  his  servants  to  the 
Lords.  Now,  his  known  love  to  the  public  was  such  as  that 
he  would  never  have  suffered  me,  or  any  other,  to  make  such 
an  alteration ;  nor  would  he  have  concealed  such  a  crime  in 
me,  loving  me  so  well  as  he  did. 

"  2.  Secondly,  'tis  notoriously  known,  that  he  crowned 
the  King,  and  administered  the  oath,  (which  was  avowed  also 
before  the  Lords  by  his  ancient  servants.)  And  it  cannot  be 
rationally  conceived  he  would  ever  have  administered  such  an 
altered  oath  to  his  Majesty. 

"3.  Thirdly,  'tis  expressed  in  my  Diary,  at  Januar.  31, 
1625,  (and  that  must  be  good  evidence  for  me,  having  been 
so  often  produced  against  me,)  that  divers  great  Lords  were 
in  this  committee  for  the  ceremonies,  and  did  that  day  sit  in 
council  upon  them  x.  And  can  it  be  thought  they  would  not 
so  much  as  compare  the  books?  or  that,  comparing  of  them, 
they  would  endure  an  oath  with  such  an  alteration  to  be 
tendered  to  the  King?  Especially,  since  'tis  before  con 
fessed  y,  that  one  copy  of  King  James  his  coronation  had  this 
alteration  in  it,  and  the  other  had  it  not. 

"  4.  Fourthly,  'tis  expressed  in  my  Diary,  and  made  use  of 

against  me,  at  Januar.  23,  1625,  that  this  book  urged  against 

*  [See  Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  180.]        y  P.  168  [of  original  MS.  See  above,  p.  215.] 


Die  me  did  agree  per  omnia  cum  libro  regaliz,  in  all  things  with 

Undecimo.  the  King,g  book  brought  out  of  the  Exchequer.     And  if  the 

book  that  I  then  had,  and  is  now  insisted  upon,  did  agree 
with  that  book  which  came  out  of  the  Exchequer,  and  that  in 
all  things,  how  is  it  possible  I  should  make  this  alteration  ? 

"  5.  Fifthly,  with  much  labour  I  got  the  books  to  be 
compared  in  the  Lords'  House; — that  of  K.  James  his  coro 
nation,  and  this  of  K.  Charles  ;  and  they  were  found  to  agree  323 
in  all  things  to  a  syllable.  Therefore,  'tis  impossible  this 
should  be  added  by  me.  And  this,  I  conceive,  cuts  off  all 
conjectural  proofs  to  the  contrary. 

"  6.  Lastly,  in  the  printed  book  of  the  votes  of  this  pre 
sent  Parliament a,  it  is  acknowledged  that  the  oath  given  to 
King  James  and  K.  Charles  was  the  same.  ,  The  same : 
therefore  unaltered.  And  this  passage  of  that  book  I  then 
showed  the  Lords  in  my  defence.  To  this  Mr.  Maynard  then 
replied,  that  the  votes  there  mentioned  '  were  upon  the  word 
elegerit,  and  the  doubt  whether  it  should  be  hath  chosen  or 
shall  choose.'  I  might  not  then  answer  to  the  reply,  but  the 
answer  is  plain ;  for,  be  the  occasion  which  led  on  the  votes 
what  it  will,  as  long  as  the  oath  is  acknowledged  the  same, 
'tis  manifest  it  could  not  be  altered  by  me.  And  I  doubt  not 
but  these  reasons  will  give  this  honourable  House  satisfaction, 
that  I  added  not  this  particular  of  the  prerogative  to  the  oath. 

"  Mr.  Brown,  in  his  last  reply,  passed  over  the  other  argu 
ments,  I  know  not  how.  But  against  this  he  took  exception. 
He  brought  the  book  with  him,  and  read  the  passage ;  and 
said  (as  far  as  I  remember)  'that  the  votes  had  relation  to 
the  word  choose,  and  not  to  this  alteration  •'  which  is  in 
effect  the  same  which  Mr.  Maynard  urged  before.  I  might 
not  reply,  by  the  course  of  the  court ;  but  I  have  again  con 
sidered  of  that  passage,  and  find  it  plain.  Thus,  first  they 
say b,  They  have  considered  '  of  all  the  alterations  in  the  form 
of  this  oath  which  they  can  find ;;  therefore,  of  this  alteration 
also,  if  any  such  were  :  then  they  say,  '  Excepting  that  oath 
which  was  taken  by  his  Majesty,  and  his  father,  K.  James  :' 
there  it  is  confessed  that  the  oath  taken  by  them  was  one 
and  the  same,  called  there  that  oath  which  was  taken  by 

z  [See  Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  179.1  b  P.  706. 

a  [Husband's  Exact  Collection,]  p.  706. 


both.  Where  falls  the  exception  then  ?  for  'tis  said,  '  Ex-  Die 
cepting  that  oath/  &c.  Why,  it  follows,— '  Excepting  that  Undecimo- 
the  word  choose  is  wholly  left  out,  as  well  hath  chosen  as  will 
choose.'  Which  is  a  most  manifest  and  evident  confession 
that  the  oath  of  King  James  and  Ki.  Charles  was  the  same 
in  all  (170)  things,  to  the  very  leaving  out  of  the  word 
choose.  Therefore,  it  was  tl\e  same  oath  all  along ;  no  dif 
ference  at  all.  For,  Exceptio  firmat  regulam  in  non  exceptisc; 
and  here's  no  exception  at  all  of  this  clause  of  the  preroga 
tive.  Therefore,  the  oath  of  both  the  Kings  was  the  same  in 
that,  or  else  the  votes  would  have  been  sure  to  mention  it. 
Where  it  may  be  observed  too,  that  Sergeant  Wilde,  though 
he  knew  these  votes,  and  was  present  both  at  the  debate  and 
the  voting,  and  so  must  know  that  the  word  choose  was 
omitted  in  both  the  oaths,  yet  at  the  first  he  charged  it 
eagerly  upon  me,  that  I  had  left  this  clause  of  choosing  out 
of  King  Ch.  his  oath,  and  added  the  other.  God  forgive 
him.  But  the  world  may  see  by  this,  and  some  other  pas 
sages,  with  what  art  my  life  was  sought  for. 

"  And  yet,  before  I  quite  leave  this  oath,  I  may  say  'tis 
not  altogether  improbable  that  this  clause,  (  and  agreeing  to 
the  prerogative  of  the  Kings  thereof/  was  added  to  the  oath 
in  Edw.  VI.  or  Queen  Elizab.'s  time :  and  hath  no  relation 
324  at  all  to  '  the  laws  of  this  kingdom/  absolutely  mentioned 
before  in  the  beginning  of  this  oath ;  but  only  to  the  words, 
'  the  profession  of  the  Gospel  established  in  this  kingdom :' 
and  then  immediately  follows,  '  and  agreeing  to  the  preroga 
tive  of  the  Kings  thereof;'  by  which  the  King  swears  to  main 
tain  his  prerogative,  according  to  God's  law,  and  the  Gospel 
established,  against  all  foreign  claims  and  jurisdictions  what 
soever.  And  if  this  be  the  meaning,  he  that  made  the 
alteration,  whoever  it  were,  (for  I  did  it  not,)  deserves  thanks 
for  it,  and  not  the  reward  of  a  traitor." 

Now,  to  return  to  the  day.     The  fourth  charge  went  on  IV. 
with   the    ceremonies   still.      But   Mr.   Sergeant   was   very 
nimble ;  for  he  leaped  from  the  coronation  at  Westminster 
to  see  what  I  did  at  Oxford.     1.  There  the  first  witness  is 
Sir  Nath.  Brent d;  and  he  says,  'The  standing  of  the  com- 

c  [See  the  Gloss  in  Clement,  lib.  v.          d  [See   Brent's  evidence  at  large, 
tit.  xi.  cap.  1.  §  Cum  autem.]  Prynne,  Cant.  Doom,  p.  71.] 


Die  munion-table  at  S.  Mary's  was  altered/     I  have  answered  to 

°*  this  situation  of  the  communion-table  already.  And  if  it  be 
lawful  in  one  place,  'tis  in  another.  For  the  chapel  of 
Magdalen  College6,  and  Christ  Church  quire f,  he  confesses 
he  knows  of  no  direction  given  by  me  to  either :  nor  doth  he 
know  whether  I  reproved  the  things  there  done  or  no.  So 
all  this  is  no  evidence.  For  the  picture  of  the  B.  Virgin 
at  S.  Mary's  door,  as  I  knew  nothing  of  it  till  it  was  done, 
so  never  did  I  hear  any  abuse  or  dislike  of  it  after  it  was 
done?.  And  here  Sir  Nathaniel  confesses,  too,  that  he  knows 
not  of  any  adoration  of  it,  as  men  passed  the  streets  or 
otherwise.  When  this  witness  came  not  home,  they  urged 
the  statute  of  Merton  College11,  or1  the  University1,  where, 
(if  I  took  my  notes  right,)  they  say, '  I  enjoined  debit  am  reve- 
rentiam.  And  as  I  know  no  fault  in  that  injunction,  or 
statute,  so  neither  do  I  know  what  due  bodily  reverence  can 
be  given  to  God  in  his  Church,  without  some  bowing  or 

2.  The  second  witness  was  Mr.  Corbettk.  He  says,  'that 
when  decent  reverence  was  required  by  my  visitors  in  one  of 
my  articles,  he  gave  reasons  against  it,  but  Sir  Jo.  Lambe 
urged  it  still.'  First,  my  Lords,  if  Mr.  Corbett's  reasons 
were  sufficient,  Sir  John  Lambe  was  to  blame  in  that ;  but 
Sir  Jo.  Lambe  must  answer  it,  and  not  I.  Secondly,  it  may 
be  observed,  that  this  man,  by  his  own  confession,  gave 
reasons  (such  as  they  were)  against  due  reverence  to  God  in 
his  own  house.  He  says,  that  '  Dr.  Frewen1  told  him  from 
me,  that  I  wished  he  should  do  as  others  did  at  St.  Mary's, 
or  let  another  execute  his  place  as  Proctor™.'  This  is  but 
a  hearsay  from  Dr.  Frewen,  who  being  at  Oxford,  I  cannot 
produce  him.  And  if  I  had  sent  such  a  message,  I  know  no 
crime  in  it.  He  says,  '  that  after  this,  he  desired  he  might 
enjoy  in  this  particular  the  liberty  which  the  King  and  the 

7  ['of  Merton  College,  or'  in  margin.] 

e  [See  Wood's  History,  p.  329.]  'l  [See  Corp.  Stat.  tit.  vii.  sect.  i.  §  11.] 

f  [Ibid.  p.  462.]  k  [See   Corbet's   evidence  in  full, 

*  [The  porch  of  S.  Mary's  Church  Prynne's  Cant.  Doom,  p.  71.] 

was    rebuilt   by  Dr.  Morgan  Owen,  l   [President  of  Magd.    Coll.     He 

Bishop  of  Llandaff.     See  History  of  was  Vice-Chancellor  at  the  time.] 

Chancellorship,  Works,  vol.  v.  p.  174.]  m  [See  History  of  Chancellorship, 

h  §  1.     [See  Works,  vol.  v.  p.  547.]  Works,  vol.  v.  p.  204.] 


Church  of  England  gave  himn'.     He  did  so  :  and  from  that  Die 
day  he  heard  no  more  of  it,  but  enjoyed  the  liberty  which  he  Undecimo- 
asked.     He  says,  '  Mr.  Channell  °  desired  the  same  liberty, 
as  well  (171)  as  he/     And  Mr.  Channell  had  it  granted,  as 
well   as  he.      He  confesses   ingenuously,   that  the   bowing 
required  was  only '  toward/  not  '  to'  the  altar.    And,  '  To  the 
picture  at  St.  Mary's  door/  he  says,  he  never  heard  of  any 
reverence  done  to  it ;  and  doth  f  believe  that  all  that  was 
325  done  at  Christ  Church  was  since  my  timep/     But  it  must  be 
his  knowledge,  not  his  belief,  that  must  make  an  evidence. 

3.  The  third  witness,  was  one  Mr.  Bendyeq.  He  says, 
'  There  was  a  crucifix  in  Lincoln  College  Chapel  since  my 
time/  If  there  be,  'tis  more  than  1  know.  My  Ld.  of  York 
that  now  is,  when  he  was  Bp.  of  Lincoln,  worthily  bestowed 
much  cost  upon  that  chapel ;  and  if  he  did  set  up  a  crucifix, 
I  think  it  was  before  I  had  aught  to  do  there r.  He  says, 
'  there  was  bowing  at  the  name  of  Jesus/  And  God  forbid 
but  there  should ;  and  the  Canon s  of  the  Church  requires 
it.  He  says,  'there  were  Latin  prayers  in  Lent,  but  he 
knows  not  who  enjoined  it/  And  then  he  might  have  held 
his  peace.  But  there  were  Latin  sermons  and  prayers  on 
Ash- Wednesday,  when  few  came  to  church,  but  the  Lent 
proceeders,  who  understood  them*.  And  in  divers  colleges 
they  have  their  morning  prayers  in  Latin,  and  had  so,  long 
before  I  knew  the  University  u.  The  last  thing  he  says,  was, 
'that  there  were  copes  used  in  some  colleges,  and  that  a 
traveller  should  say,  upon  the  sight  of  them,  that  he  saw  just 
such  a  thing  upon  the  Pope's  back/  This  wise  man  might  . 
have  said  as  much  of  a  gown  :  He  saw  a  gown  on  the  Pope's 
back ;  therefore  a  Protestant  may  not  wear  one  :  or,  entering 
into  S.  Paul's,  he  may  cry,  Down  with  it;  for  I  saw  the  Pope 
in  just  such  another  church  in  Home. 

n  [See    Corbet's  petition,    ibid.   p.      built  at  the  charge  of  Bp.  Williams, 
205.]  and   consecrated    by  Bp.  Corbet,   in 

0  I.  Cheynell.    [See  ibid,  note  n.]  1631.] 

P  And  the  third  witness  agrees  in  s  Can.  18. 

this.  *  [See  Corp.  Statut.  tit.  vi.  sect.  ii. 

1  [See   Bendy 's  evidence    on  this  §5.] 

C'  it  in  Prynne's  Cant.  Doom,  p.  71.  u   [See   Queen  Elizabeth's   Letters 

dy  was  employed  together  with  Patent    for    translating  the   Prayer- 

Prynne   to  search  the   Archbishop's  Book    into    Latin.      Wilkins'    Cone, 

study.  (Ibid.  p.  66.)]  torn.  iv.  p.  217.] 
r  [Lincoln  College  Chapel  was  re- 


Die  4.  Then  was  urged  the  conclusion  of  a  letter  of  mine  sent 

'  to  that  University.  The  words  were  to  this  effect,  f  I  desire 
you  to  remember  me  a  sinner,  quoties  coram  altare  Dei  pro- 
cidatis  V  The  charge  lay  upon  the  word  procidatis  ;  which 
is  no  more,  than  that  when  they  there  fall  on  their  knees, 
or  prostrate  *  to  prayer,  they  would  remember  me 2.  In 
which  desire  of  mine,  or  expression  of  it,  I  can  yet  see  no 
offence.  No,  nor  in  coram  altare,  their  solemnest  time  of 
prayer  being  at  the  Communion.  "  Here  Mr.  Brown  aggra 
vated  the  things  done  in  that  University  :  and  fell  upon  the 
titles  given  me  in  some  letters  from  thence;  but  because 
I  have  answered  those  titles  already,  I  refer  the  reader 
thither  w,  and  shall  not  make  here  any  tedious  repetition. 
Only  this  I  shall  add,  that  in  the  civil  law  'tis  frequent  to 
be  seen,  that  not  bishops  only  one  to  another,  but  the  great 
emperors  of  the  world  have  commonly  given  that  title  of 
sanctitas  vestra,  to  bishops  of  meaner  place  than  myself ;  to 
say  no  more.  But  here  Mr.  Brown,  in  his  last  reply,  was 
pleased  to  say,  ( This  title  was  not  given  to  any  bishop  of 
England  V  First,  if  I  had  my  books  about  me,  perhaps  this 
might  be  refuted.  Secondly,  why  should  so  grave  a  man  as 
he  so  much  disparage  his  own  nation  ?  Is  it  impossible  (be 
my  unworthiness  what  it  will)  for  an  English  Bp.  to  deserve 
as  good  a  title  as  another  ?  Thirdly,  be  that  as  it  may,  if 
it  were  (as  certainly  it  was)  lawfully  given  to  other  Bps., 
though  they  not  English,  then  is  it  neither  '  blasphemy/  nor 
'  assumption  of  Papal  power/  as  was  charged  upon  it  V 
V.  From  Oxford  Mr.  Sergeant  went  to  Cambridge.  And 
I  must  be  guilty,  if  aught  were  amiss  there  too.  For  this 
fifth  charge  were  produced  three  witnesses :  Mr.  Wallis  y, 
Mr.  Greece z,  and  Mr.  Seaman  a.  Their  testimonies  agreed 

1  ['  or  prostrate '  in  margin.] 

2  ['  they  would  remember  me.'  on  opposite  page.] 

3  ['  Here  Mr.  Brown  .  .  .  it.'  on  opposite  page.] 

v  [See  Abp.  Laud's  Letter  to  the  z  [Prynne  terms  him  Nicholas  le 

University,  June  28,  1639.     History  Greise.     See  his  evidence,  ibid.  p.  74. 

of    Chancellorship,    Works,    vol.    v.  He  was  elected"  Scholar  of  S.  John's 

p.  227.]  College,   Oxford,  in   1635.     (Wilson, 

w  [See  above,  pp.  157—159.]  Merch.  Tailors'  School,  p.  1195.)] 

1  [See  above,  p.  159.]  a    [Lazarus     Seaman,     afterwards 

y  [See    his   evidence    in   Prynne's  Master  of  Peter  House.     See  his  evi- 

Cant.  Doom,  p.  73.]  dence,  Prynne,  Cant.  Doom,  p.  74.] 


very  near ;  so  I  will  answer  them  together.  First,  they  say,  Die 
'That  at  Peter-House  there  were  copes  and  candlesticks,  Undecimo' 
326  and  pictures  in  the  glass  windows ;  and  the  like/  But  these 
things  I  have  often  answered  already,  and  shall  not  repeat. 
They  say,  '  the  chief  authors  of  these  things  were  Dr.  Wren  b 
and  Dr^  Cosens c.'  They  are  both  living,  why  are  they  not 
called  to  answer  their  own  acts  ?  For  here  's  yet  no  show  of 
proof  to  bring  anything  home  to  me.  For  no  one  of  them 
says,  that  I  gave  direction  for  any  of  these.  No,  (says 
Mr.  Sergeant,)  but  '  why  did  I  tolerate  them  ? '  First,  no 
man  complained  to  me.  Secondly,  I  was  not  Chancellor, 
and  endured  no  small  envy  for  any  little  thing  that  I  had 
occasion  to  look  upon  in  that  place.  And  thirdly,  this  was 
not  the  least  cause,  why  I  followed  my  right  for  power  to 
visit  there  d.  And  though  that  power  was  confirmed  to  me, 
yet  the  times  have  been  such  as  that  I  did  not  then  think  fit 
to  use  it.  It  would  have  but  heaped  more  envy  on  me,  who 
bare  too  much  already.  "As  for  Mr.  Greece,  who  hath 
laboured  much  against  me  in  all  this  business,  God  forgive 
him ;  and  while  he  inherits  his  father's  ill  affections  to  me, 
God  preserve  him  from  his  father's  end e." 

From  Cambridge  he  went  to  the  cathedrals,  and  first  to  VI. 
Canterbury.  Here  the  charge  is,  '  bowing  versus  altare  /  the 
two  witnesses,  two  prebendaries  of  that  church,  Dr.  Jackson f, 
and  Dr.  Blechenden^.  And  first,  Dr.  Jackson  says,  the  ' bow 
ing  was  versus  altare : '  so  not,  '  to/  but  '  toward '  the  altar : 
and  Dr.  Blechenden  says,  '  it  was  the  adoration  of  the  high 
majesty  of  God,  to  whom,  if  no  altar  were  there,  I  should 
bow.'  Dr.  Jackson  says,  'this  bowing  was  to  his  grief? 
Strange  !  I  avow  to  your  Lps.  and  the  world,  no  man  did 
so  much  approve  all  my  proceedings  in  that  church  as  he  ; 
and  for  this  particular,  he  never  found  the  least  fault  with  it 
(172)  to  me;  and  if  he  conceal  his  grief,  I  cannot  ease  it. 
He  says,  '  this  bowing  was  not  in  use  till  within  this  six  or 

b    [Dr.   Matthew   Wren,    admitted  of  Durham.] 

Master,  July  26,  1625,  afterwards  sue-  d  [See  above,  p.  193,  note  k.] 

cessively    Bishop  of   Hereford,   Nor-  e  [See  above,  p.  48,  note  £.] 

wich,  and  Ely.]  f  [Thomas  Jackson,  Prebendary  of 

c  [Dr.  John  Cosiu,  admitted  Master,  the  third  Stall,  Eector  of  Ivy  Church, 

Feb.  8,  163$  ;   ejected  by  the  Parlia-  and  Minister  of  Wye  in  Kent;    died 

mentary  Commissioners,   March   13,  Nov.  1646.] 

164f ;  Dean  of  Peterborough,  Nov.  7,  g  [Thomas  Blechinden,  Prebendary 

1640 ;  after  the  Restoration,   Bishop  of  the  second  Stall.] 


Die  seven  years/     Sure  the  old  man's  memory  fails  him.     For 

mo'  Dr.  Blechenden  says,  '  the  communion-table  was  railed  about, 
and  bowings  before  it,  when  he  came  first  to  be  a  member 
of  that  church ;  and  saith,  upon  his  oath,  that 's  above  ten 
years  ago.  And  that  it  was  practised  before  their  new 
statutes  were  made;  and  that  in  those  statutes  no  punish 
ment  is  inflicted  for  the  breach,  or  not  performance  of  this 
reverence/  I  could  tell  your  Lps.  how  often  Dr.  Jackson 
hath  shifted  his  opinions  in  religion,  but  that  they  tell  me 
their  witnesses  must  not  be  scandalized.  As  for  the  sta 
tutes,  my  secretary,  Mr.  Dell,  who  copied  them  out,  testified 
here  to  the  Lords>  that  I  left  out  divers  superstitions  which 
were  in  the  old  book,  and  ordained  many  sermons  in  their 
rooms  h. 

The  next  cathedral  he  instanced  in  was  Winchester1.  But 
there 's  nothing  but  the  old  objections,  copes.  And  the 
wearing  of  them  is  warranted  by  the  Canon k;  and  'reverence 
at  coming  in,  and  going  out  of  the  church/  And  that,  great 
kings  have  not  (in  better  ages)  thought  much  to  do.  And 
they  did  well  to  instance  in  the  College  of  Winchester  as 
well  as  the  church;  for  'tis  confessed,  the  injunction  sent 
thither  requires,  that  '  the  reverence  used  be  such  as  is  not 
dissonant  from  the  Church  of  England  V  So,  this  may  be  a 
comment  to  the  other  injunctions1.  "  But  for  the  copes  in 
cathedrals,  Mr.  Brown  in  his  last  reply  was  not  satisfied, 
For  he  said,  ( the  Canon  mentioned  but  the  wearing  of  one 
cope/  Be  it  so :  but  they  must  have  that  before  they  can  327 
wear  it.  And  if  the  Canon  enjoin  the  wearing  of  one,  my 
injunction  might  require  the  providing  and  using  of  one. 
Besides,  if  there  be  no  Popery,  no  introduction  to  supersti 
tion  in  the  having  or  using  of  one ;  then  certainly,  there  can 
be  none  in  the  having  of  more  for  the  same  use :  the  super 
stition  being  lodged  in  the  misuse,  not  in  the  number/' 
VII.  From  the  cathedrals,  Mr.  Sergeant  went  to  view  some 

1  [The  Archbishop  originally  meant  here  to  go  on  to  the  seventh  charge, 
without  adding  Mr.  Brown's  reply,  for  he  begins  the  seventh  charge,  and 
erases  it.] 

h  [The  Statutes  of  Canterbury  Ca-  cheater  Cathedral,  ibid.  pp.  478,  479.] 

thedral  are  printed  in  full  in  vol.  v.  k   Can.  24. 

pp.  506  seq.]  ]    [See    the    Injunctions   to   Win- 

'    [See    the    Injunctions   to   Win-  Chester  College,  Works,  vol.  v.  p.  49G.] 


parish  churches.     And  first,  'tis  charged,  '  that  in  a  parish  Die 
church  at  Winchester,  two  seats  were  removed  to  make  way  Undecimo- 
for  railing   in  of  the  communion-table1"/     But  for  aught 
I  know,  this  might  have  been  concealed.     For  it  was  liked 
so  well,  that  they  to  whom  the  seats  belonged,  removed  them 
at  their  own  charges,  that  the  other  might  be  done. 

The  next  instance  was  in  S.  Gregory's  Church,  by  S,  Paul's". 
The  charge  was,  '  the  placing  of  the  communion-table  altar- 
wise/  To  the  charge  itself  answer  is  given  before.  The 
particulars  which  are  new  are  these  :  The  witness  Mr.  Wyan. 
He  says,  '  the  order  for  such  placing  of  the  table  was  from 
the  Dean  and  Chapter  of  S.  Paul's.'  And  S.  Gregory's  is 
in  their  peculiar  jurisdiction.  So  the  holy-table  was  there 
placed  by  the  ordinary,  not  by  me.  He  says  next,  '  That 
the  parishioners  appealed  to  the  Arches,  but  received  an 
order  to  command  them  and  the  cause  to  the  Council-board : 
that  it  was  a  full  Board  when  the  cause  was  heard,  and  his 
Majesty  present :  and  that  there  I  maintained  the  Queen's 
injunction,  about  placing  the  communion-table0.'  In  all 
this,  here  's  nothing  charged  upon  me,  but  maintenance  of 
the  injunction ;  and  I  had  been  much  to  blame  if  I  should 
not  have  maintained  it.  He  says,  '  Sir  Henr.  Martin  came 
and  saw  it,  and  said  it  would  make  a  good  Court  cupboard.' 
If  Sir  Henry  did  say  so,  the  scorn  ill  became  either  his  age 
or  profession ;  though  a  '  Court  cupboard '  be  somewhat  a 
better  phrase  than  a  c  dresser.'  God  forgive  them  who  have 
in  print  called  it  so.  He  says,  '  That  hereupon  I  did  say, 
that  he  which  spake  that,  had  a  stigmatical  Puritan  in  his 
bosom.'  This  man's  memory  serves  him  long  for  words : 
this  was  many  years  since;  and  if  I  did  speak  anything 
sounding  this  way,  'tis  more  like  I  should  say  '  schismatical,' 
than  '  stigmatical  Puritan.'  But  let  him  look  to  his  oath ; 
and  which  word  soever  I  used,  if  Sir  Henry  used  the  one,  he 
might  well  hear  the  other.  For  a  profane  speech  it  was,  and 
little  becoming  a  Dean  of  the  Arches.  He  says,  '  that  soon 
after  this,  Sir  Henr.  was  put  out  of  his  place.'  Not  very 

m   [This  was  S.  Maurice's  Church.  88 ;  and  Kuslmorth's  Collections,  vol. 

See  Prynne's  Cant.  Doom,  p.  91.]  ii.  p.  207.] 

n  [See  the  order  for  placing  the         °  Q.  Eliz.  Injunct.  fine.  [Wilkins' 

communion-table     in     S.    Gregory's  Cone.  torn.  iv.  p.  188.] 
Church,  in  Prynne's  Cant.  Doom,  p. 

LAUD. — VOL.  iv.  Q, 


Die  soon  after  this  ;  (173)  for  I  was  at  the  time  of  this  business 

mo'  (as  far  as  I  remember)  Bishop  of  London,  and  had  nothing 
to  do  with  the  disposing  of  his  place.  After,  when  I  came 
to  be  Archbishop,  I  found  his  patent  was  void,  neither  could 
Sir  Henry  himself  deny  it.  And  being  void,  and  in  my  gift, 
I  gave  it  to  another?. 

He  says  further,  '  that  it  was  urged  that  this  way  of  placing 
the  communion-table  was  against  the  word  of  God,  in  Bp. 
Jewel,  and  Mr.  Fox  his  judgment;  and  that  I  replied,  it 
were  better  they  should  not  have  these  books  in  churches, 
than  so  to  abuse  them  *».'  First,  for  aught  I  yet  know  (and 
in  these  straits  of  time  the  books  I  cannot  come  at),  their 
judgment,  rightly  understood,  is  not  so.  Secondly,  though 
these  two  were  very  worthy  men  in  their  time,  yet  every 
thing  which  they  say  is  not  by  and  by  '  the  doctrine  of  the 
Church  of  England/  And  I  may  upon  good  reason  depart  328 
from  their  judgment  in  some  particulars,  and  yet  not  differ 
from  the  Church  of  England.  As  in  this  very  particular, 
the  injunction  for  placing  of  the  table  so,  is  the  act  of  the 
Queen  and  the  Church  of  England.  And  I  conceive  the 
Queen,  then  upon  the  act  of  reformation,  would  not  have 
enjoined  it,  nor  the  Church  obeyed  it,  had  it  been  against 
the  word  of  God.  Thirdly,  if  I  did  say,  '  that  if  they  could 
make  no  better  use  of  Jewel  and  the  Book  of  Martyrs,  it 
were  better  they  had  them  not  in  the  churches ; '  they  gave 
too  great  occasion  for  the  speech :  for  they  had  picked  divers 
things  out  of  those  books  which  they  could  not  master,  and 
with  them  distempered  both  themselves  and  their  neigh 
bours.  And  yet  in  hope  other  more  modest  men  might 
make  better  use  of  them,  I  never  gave  counsel  to  have  those 
books  removed,  (nor  is  that  so  much  as  charged,)  but  said 
only  thus,  That  if  no  better  use  would  be  made  of  them, 
then  that  last  remedy ;  but  never  till  then.  "  This  last 
passage  Mr.  Brown  insisted  upon  :  '  The  taking  of  good  books 
from  the  people/  But  as  I  have  answered,  there  was  no  such 

P  [Sir  John  Lambe  was  his  sue-  ferred  to  by  them,  were  Jewell's  Reply 

cessor.]  to  Harding,  art.  iii.  div.  26,  (Jewell's 

i  [Jewell  and  Fox  were  both  quoted  Works,  p.  145.  Lond.  1609;)  and  art. 

by  the  Counsel  for  the  Parishioners,  xiii.  div.  6,  p.  362  ;  and  Fox's  Acts 

against  the 'Innovation.'  See  Prynne's  and  Monuments,  pp.  1211,  1212. 

Cant.  Doom,  p.  87.  The  passages  re-  Edit.  1612.] 


thing  done,  or  intended ;  only  a  word  spoken  to  make  busy  Die 

men  see  how  they  abused  themselves  and  the  Church,  by  Undecimo- 

misunderstanding  and  misapplying  that  which  was  written 

for  the  good  of  both."     Lastly,  '  It  was  urged/  he  said,  'that 

the  communion-table  must  stand  altar-wise,  that  strangers 

which  come  and  look  into  these  churches,  might  not   see 

such  a  disproportion :    the  holy-table  standing  one  way  in 

the  mother-church,  and   quite    otherwise   in  the  parochial 

annexed/    And  truly,  to  see  this,  could  be  no  commendation 

of  the  discipline  of  the  Church  of  England.     But  howsoever, 

Mr.  Clarke  (the  other  witness  with  Wyan,  and  agreeing  with 

him  in  the  most)  says  plainly,  that  it  was  the  L.  of  Arundelr 

that  spake  this,  not  I ;  and  that  he  was  seconded  in  it  by  the 

L.  Weston,  then  L.  Treasurer s,  not  by  me. 

The  last  charge  of  this  day  was  a  passage  out  of  one  VIII. 
Mr.  Shelford' s  book,  pp.  20,  21,  <  That  they  must  take  the 
reverend  prelates  for  their  examples1/  &c.  And  Mr.  Pryn 
witnessed,  '  the  like  was  in  the  Missal/  p.  256.  Mr.  Shelford 
is  a  mere  stranger  to  me ;  his  book  I  never  read ;  if  he  have 
said  anything  unjust  or  untrue,  let  him  answer  for  himself. 
As  for  the  like  to  that,  which  he  says,  being  in  the  Missal, 
though  that  be  but  a  weak  argument,  yet  let  him  solve  it. 

Here  this  day  ending,  I  was  put  .off*  to  Saturday,  June  1.  Junii  1. 
And  then  again  put  off  to  Thursday,  June  6,  which  held.         Junii  6. 

r  [Thomas  Howard,  Earl  Marshall.]  fathers,  the  prelates,  and  others,  make 

s  [Richard  Weston,  created  Baron  their  reverence  to  God  on  this  wise, 

Weston,  and  Earl  of  Portland.     He  both  on  their  entry  and  return,  &c." 

was  Lord  High  Treasurer  from  July  — Five  Pious  and  Learned  Discourses, 

15,  1628,  to  his  death  in  1634.]  by  Robert  Shelford,  of  Ringsfield,  in 

*   ["  Let  us  learn  of  our  mother  Suffolk,   Priest.     Serm.  i.  '  On  God's 

Churches,    for    there    our    reverend  House,'  p.  20.  Camb.  1635,] 


CAP.  XXXIV.  329 


Thursday,  THIS  day  Sergeant  Wild,  instead  of  beginning  with  a  new 
16441  6'  charge,  made  another  long  reply  to  my  answers  of  the  former 
Die  Duo-  (lay.  Whether  he  found  that  his  former  reply  made  at  the 
time,  was  weak,  and  so  reputed,  I  cannot  tell.  "  But  another 
he  made,  as  full  of  premeditated  weakness,  as  the  former  was 
of  sudden.  Mr.  Pryn  I  think  perceived  it,  and  was  often  at 
his  ear ;  but  Mr.  Sergeant  was  little  less  than  angry,  and 
would  on.  I  knew  I  was  to  make  no  answer  to  any  reply, 
and  so  took  no  notes :  indeed,  holding  it  all  as  it  was,  that 
is,  either  nothing,  (174)  or  nothing  to  the  purpose.  This 
tedious  reply  ended — 

I.  Then  came  on  the  first  charge  about  the  window  of  coloured 
glass  set  up  in  the  new  chapel  at  Westminster a.  It  was  the 
history  of  the  coming  down  of  the  Holy  Ghost  upon  the 
Apostles.  This  was  charged  to  be  done  by  me,  and  at  my 
cost :  the  witnesses,  Mr.  Brown,  employed  in  setting  up  the 
window,  and  Mr.  Sutton  the  glazier. 

These  men  say, '  that  Dr.  Newell,  Sub-dean  of  Westminster15, 
gave  order  for  the  window  and  the  setting  of  it  up;  but  they 
know  not  at  whose  cost,  nor  was  any  order  given  from  me.5 
So  here 's  nothing  charged  upon  me.  And  if  it  were,  I  know 
nothing  amiss  in  the  window.  As  for  the  King's  arms  being 
taken  down  (as  they  say),  let  them  answer  that  did  it. 
Though  I  believe,  that  the  King's  arms  standing  alone  in  a 

a  [This    was   Tothilfields    Chapel,  first  Sermon  in  it  (Newc.  Repert,  vol. 

erected  1631-1636  ;   Dr.  George  Dar-  i.  pp.  722,  923).     The  window  referred 

rell,  one  of  the  Prebendaries  of  "West-  to  was  demolished  by  order  of  Parlia- 

minster,  having  in  the  former  of  these  ment  (Prynne,  Cant.  Doom,  p.  93).] 
years  left  £400  for  the  purpose.     It          b  [Robert    Newell,   Prebendary  of 

was  first  opened  by  order  of  the  House  the  ninth   stall,  and  Archdeacon  of 

of  Commons,  dated  Dec.  9,  1642,  and  Buckingham.     He  was  half  brother  of 

by  their  further   order  of  Dec.   18.  Abp.  Neile.     He  had  died  in  1643. 

Dr.  Gouge,  of  Blackfriars,  preached  the  (Wood,  P.  0.  i.  289.)] 


white  window,  was  not  taken  down  out  of  any  ill  meaning,  Die  Duo- 
but  only  out  of  necessity  to  make  way  for  the  history.  deeimo. 

The  second  charge  was  the  picture  of  the  B.  Virgin  set  II. 
upon  a  new-built  door  at  S.  Mary's  in  Oxford.  Here  Alder 
man  Nixon c  says,  '  that  some  passengers  put  off  their  hats, 
and,  as  he  supposes,  to  that  picture/  But,  my  Lds.,  his 
supposal  is  no  proof.  He  says,  '  that  the  next  day  he  saw  it.' 
But  what  did  he  see  ?  Nothing,  but  the  putting  off  the  hat ; 
for  he  could  not  see  why,  or  to  what ;  unless  they  which  put 
off,  told  it.  They  might  put  off  to  some  acquaintance  that 
passed  by.  He  further  says,  '  he  saw  a  man  in  that  porch 
upon  his  knees,  and  he  thinks  praying ;  but  he  cannot  say  to 
that.'  But  then  ("  if  the  malice  he  hath  long  borne  me, 
would  have  suffered  him")  he  might  have  stayed  till  he  knew 
to  whom  he  was  praying,  for  till  then  it  is  no  evidence.  He 
says,  '  he  thinks  that  I  countenanced  the  setting  of  it  up, 
because  it  was  done  by  Bp.  Owend.'  But  Mr.  Bromfeeld, 
who  did  that  work,  gave  testimony  to  the  Lords,  that  I  had 
nothing  to  do  in  it.  He  says,  '  there  was  an  image  set  up  at 
Carfax  Church,  but  pulled  down  again6  by  Mr.  Widdows f, 
Vicar  there/  But  this  hath  no  relation  at  all  to  me. 
"  This  picture  of  the  B.  Virgin  was  twice  mentioned  before. 
And  Sir  Nath.  Brent  could  say  nothing  to  it  but  hearsay. 
And  Mr.  Corbet  did  not  so  much  as  hear  of  any  abuse.  And 
now  Alderman  Nixon  says,  he  saw  hats  put  off ;  but  the  wise 
330  man  knows  not  to  what.  Nor  is  there  any  show  of  proof 
offered,  that  I  had  any  hand  or  approbation  in  the  setting  of 
it  up.  Or  that  ever  any  complaint  was  made  to  me  of  any 
abuse  to  it,  or  dislike  of  it.  And  yet  Mr.  Brown,  when  he 
gave  the  sum  of  the  charge  against  me,  insisted  upon  this 
also,  as  some  great  fault  of  mine,  which  I  cannot  yet  see." 

In  the  next  charge,  Mr.  Sergeant  is  gone  back  again  to   III. 
White-Hall,  as  in  the  former  to  Oxford.     The  witnesses  are 
Mrs.   Charnocks   and  her  daughter.     They  say  they  went 

c  [See  Nixon's  testimony  in  volved  him  in  controversy  with  Prynne, 

Prynne's  Cant.  Doom,  p.  72.]  who  had  been  his  pupil  at  Oriel.  He 

d  [See  above,  p.  220.]  died  in  164$  (Wood,  Ath.  Ox.  iii.  179). 

e  [Prynne  (Cant,  Doom,  p.  72)  says  See  also  Laud's  History  of  Chancellor- 
it  was  erected  by  Widdowes.]  ship,  Works,  vol.  v.  p.  39,  note '".] 

f  [Giles  Widdowes,  the  author  of  «  [Sec  her  testimony  in  Prynne'b 

'  The  Schismatical  Puritan,'  which  in-  Cant,  Doom,  p.  69.] 


Die  Duo-    (being  at  court)  into  the  chapel,  and  it  seems  a  woman  with 
decimo.       them,  that  was  a  Papist :  and  that  <  while  they  were  there, 
Dr.  Brown  h,  one  of  the  King's  Chaplains,  came  in,  bowed 
toward  the  communion-table,  and  then  at  the  altar  kneeled 
down  to  his  prayers/     I  do  not  know  of  any  fault  Dr.  Brown 
committed,  either  in  doing  reverence  to   God,   or  praying, 
and  there.     And  yet  if  he  had  committed  any  fault,  I  hope 
I  shall  not  answer  for  him.     I  was  not  then  Dean  of  the 
Chapel,  nor  did  any  ever  complain  to  me.     They  say,  '  that 
two  strangers  came  into  the  chapel  at  the  same  time,  and 
saw  what  Dr.  Brown  did,  and  said  thereupon,  that  sure  we 
did  not  differ  much,  and  should  be  of  one  religion  shortly. 
And  that  the  woman  which  was  with  these  witnesses,  told 
them  they  were  Priests/     First,  this  can  no  way  relate  to  me ; 
for  neither  did  these  women  complain  to  me  of  it,  nor  any 
from  them.     Secondly,  if  these  two  men  were  Priests,  and 
did  say  as  is  testified ;  are  we  ever  a  whit  the  nearer  them 
in  religion  ?     Indeed,  if  all  the  difference  between  Rome  and 
us   con(175)sisted  in  outward   reverence,  and   no  points  of 
doctrine,  some  argument  might  hence   be  drawn;    but  the 
points  of  doctrine  being  so  many  and  great,  put  stop  enough 
to  that.      Thirdly,  if  recusants,   Priests   especially,  did   so 
speak,  might  it  not  be  said  in  cunning,  to  discountenance  all 
external  worship  in  the  service  of  God,  that  so  they  may 
have  opportunity  to  make   more  proselytes?      And  'tis  no 
small  advantage,  to  my  knowledge,  which  they  have  this  way 
made.     "  And  this  was  the  answer  which  I  gave  Mr.  Brown, 
when  he  charged  this  upon  me  in  the  House  of  Commons." 

Here,  before  they  went  any  further,  Mr.  Sergeant  Wilde 
told  the  Lords,  that  when  Sir  Nath.  Brent  was  employed  in 
my  visitation,  '  he  had  instructions  for  particular  churches, 
of  which  some  were  tacit  intimations,  and  some  express1.'  I 
know  not  to  what  end  this  was  spoken;  for  no  coherent 
charge  followed  upon  it.  But  sure,  he  thinks  Sir  Nath. 
Brent  very  skilful  in  me,  that  he  can  understand  my  tacit 

h  [Dr.   Jonathan   Brown,    Dean  of  Herbert  Croft,  afterwards  Bishop  of 

Hereford,  Prebendary  of  Westminster,  Hereford.    (Wood,  F.  0.  i.  456 ;  and 

Rector  of  S.  Faith's,  London,  and  of  Walker's  Sufferings,  p.  34.)  ] 

Hertingfordbury  in  Herts.     He  died  '  [See  this  point  urged  in  Prynne's 

at  the  end  of  1643,  and  was  succeeded  Cant.  Doom,  p.  89.] 
in    his    Deanery   by  his    son-in-law, 


intimations,  and  know  to  what  particular  church  to  apply  Die  Duo- 
them.  "  And  as  I  said  no  more  at  the  bar,  so  neither  did  I  decimo- 
think  to  say  any  more  after ;  yet  now  I  cannot  but  a  little 
bemoan  myself.  For  ever  since  Mr.  Maynard  left  off,  who 
pleaded,  though  strongly,  yet  fairly  against  me,  I  have  been 
in  very  ill  condition  between  the  other  two.  For  from  Mr. 
Nicolas  I  had  some  sense,  but  extreme  virulent  and  foul 
language.  Arid  from  Sergeant  Wilde,  language  good  enough 
sometimes,  but  little  or  no  sense.  For  let  me  answer  what 
I  would,  when  he  came  to  reply,  he  repeated  the  charge 
again,  as  if  I  had  made  no  answer  at  all.  Or  as  if  all  that  I 
331  expressed  never  so  plainly,  had  been  but  '  tacit  intimations  ;' 
which  I  think  he  understood  as  much  as  Sir  Nath.  Brent 1." 

In  the  fourth  charge,  he  told  the  Lords  he  would  not  IV. 
trouble  them  with  repeating  the  evidence,  but  only  put  them 
in  mind  of  some  things  in  the  case  of  Ferdinando  Adams,  of 
Ipswich k  :  of  the  men  of  Lewis  suffering  in  the  High-Com 
mission111:  of  the  parishioners  of  Beckingtori n,  and  some 
others  heard  before;  but  would  leave  the  Lords  to  their 
memory  and  their  notes.  Yet  read  over  the  sentences  given 
in  the  High-Commission,  and  make  a  repetition  of  what 
soever  might  but  make  a  show  to  render  me  odious  to  the 
people.  "  And  this  hath  been  their  art  all  along,  to  run 
over  the  same  thing  twice  and  again  (as  they  did  here  in  the 
second  charge  about  the  picture  of  the  B.  Virgin)  :  to  the 
end,  that  as  the  auditors  changed,  the  more  of  them  might 
hear  it;  and  that  which  wrought  not  upon  some,  might  upon 
others.  In  all  which  I  patiently  referred  myself  to  my 
former  answers,  having  no  other  way  to  help  myself;  in 
regard  they  pretended  that  they  renewed  the  same  instances, 
but  not  the  same  way ;  but  in  one  place,  as  against  law ;  and 
in  another,  as  against  religion.  But  why  then  did  they  in 
both  places  run  over  all  circumstances  appliable  to  both? 
1 .  And  on  they  went,  too,  with  the  men  of  Lewis,  where  one 

1  [The  whole  of  this  paragraph,  '  Here,  before  .  .  .  Brent.'  on  opposite  page.] 

k  P.    131    [of    original    MS.     See          n  P.  129    [of    original    MS.      See 
above,  p.  130.]  above,  p.  124.] 

m  [SeePrynne'sCant.Doom,p.  101.] 


Die  Duo-  Mr.  ParnlyeP  (they /say)  'was  censured  cruelly  in  the  High- 
Commission,  for  not  removing  the  communion-table/  The 
business  was  but  this.  Sir  Nath.  Brent,  and  his  own  ordi 
nary,  Dr.  Nevill q,  ordered  the  remove  of  the  table  :  He  would 
not.  For  this  contumacy  he  was  censured,  but  enjoined l 
only  to  make  his  submission  to  Dr.  Nevill.  Which  I  think 
was  a  sentence  far  from  any  barbarous  cruelty,  as  'tis  called. 

2.  Another  instance,  and  the  next,  was  Mr.  Burkct1'.     He 
says,  '  he  was  censured  also  about  removing  the  communion 
table,  and  for  that  only/     But  first,  this  was  not  simply  for 
removing  the  holy-table  ;  but  it  was  for  abetting  the  church 
wardens  to  remove   it   back   again  from   the   place,  where 
lawful  authority  had  set  it.     And  secondly,  whereas  he  says, 
'  he  was  censured  for  this  only ; '  the  very  charge  itself  con 
futes  him.     For  there  'tis  said,  that  this,  about  removing  of 
the  communion-table,  appears  in  the  sixth  article  that  was 
against  him.     Therefore  there  were  five  other  articles  at  least 
more  against  him.     And  therefore  not  this  only. 

3.  The  third  instance  was  in  Mr.  Chancye s :  and  he  like 
wise  is  said  ( to  have  suffered  very  much  only  about  railing  in 
of  the  communion-table/     But  this  is  not  so  neither.     For 
he  confesses  that  he  spake  reproachful  words  against  authority, 
and  in  contempt  of  his  ordinary.     That  he  said,  the  rails 
were  fit  to  be  set  up  in  his  garden.     That  he  came  fifty  miles 
from  his  own  church,  on  purpose  to  countenance  this  busi 
ness.     And  all  this  he  acknowledges  upon  his  oath  in  his 
submission.     And  yet  nothing  laid  upon  him  but  suspension, 
and  that  no  longer  than  till  he  submitted.     And  all  this 
the  act   of  the    High-Commission,  not   mine.     ee  And  so  I 
answered  Mr.  Brown,  who  urged  this  against  me  also/'     And 
the  truth  of  all  this  appears  apud  Acta ;  though  they  were 

1  ['enjoined'  in  margin.] 

P  [  Prynne  calls  him' John  Premly.']  8  [Charles  Chancey,  formerly  Vicar 

i  [William    Neville,    D.  C.  L.,"  of  of  Ware,  in  Hertfordshire,  at  the  time 

Merton  Coll.  and  Chancellor  of  Chi-  of  the  offence  complained  of,  Vicar  of 

Chester.  (Wood,  F.  0.  i.  469.)]  Marston  St.  Lawrence,  in  Northamp- 

1  [Miles  Burkett  was  Vicar  of  Pates-  tonshire.  See  a  detailed  account  of  the 

hull,  in  Northamptonshire.     See  some  proceedings  against  him,  his  submis- 

of  the  charges  against  him  in  Prynnc,  sion,  &c.,  in  Prynne,  Cant.  Doom,  pp. 

Cant.  Doom,  p.  96.]  93— 96.J 


taken  away,  and  kept   ever  since  from  my  use,  yet  many  Die  Duo- 
332  things  done  in  that  court  have  been  charged  against  me.  decimo- 
And  here  stepped  in  a  testimony  of  Mr.  Genebrards  *,  that  I 
'  threatened  openly  in  the  High-Commission  to  suspend  Dr. 
Merrick  V     And  why  might  I  not  do  it,  if  he  will  be  over 
bold  with  the  proceeding  of  the  whole  court  ?     I  have  known 
ere  now,  a  very  good  lawyer  committed  from  the  Chancery 
Bar  to  the  Meet.     Though  I  shall  spare  names. 

(176)  4.  The  fourth  instance  was  in  Mr.  Workman's  case  : 
charged  as  if  he  were  sentenced  '  only  for  preaching  a  sermon 
to  the  judges,  against  images  in  churches  V  1.  The  first  wit 
ness  in  the  cause  was  Mr.  Langly  y :  he  says,  '  Mr.  Workman 
was  censured  for  this  sermon,  and  other  things/  Therefore 
not  for  this  sermon  only  :  the  High-Commissioners  were  110 
such  patrons  of  images.  He  says,  ( that  when  I  was  Dean  of 
Gloucester,  I  told  them  in  the  chapel,  that  K.  James  had 
heard  of  many  things  amiss  in  that  church,  and  required 
me  to  take  care  of  them/  'Tis  true,  he  did  so.  He  says 
further,  { that  hereupon  I  placed  the  communion-table  altar- 
wise,  and  commanded  due  reverence  at  the  coming  into  the 
church2.'  This  I  did,  and  I  have  given  my  reason  often 

t  [  Prynne  gives  the  name  Gelli-  place[d]  altarwise  at  the  upper  ende  of 

brand.  He  is  a  different  person  from  the  quier,  close  unt[o  the  east]  walle, 

Gellibrand  the  writer  of  the  almanack  upon  the  uppermost  greases  or  steppes, 

mentioned  below.  There  were  several  An[d  also]  as  it  is  used  in  the  King's 

persons  of  that  name  who  were  book-  Maties  Chapell,  and  in  a[ll]  or  the 

sellers  at  this  time.]  moste  pte  of  the  Cathedral!  Churches 

u  [See  vol.  iii.  p.  450,  note  c.]  of  th[is]  realme. 

*  [See  John  Workman's  case  stated  „  wmiam  Laud  Deane 

G'S  PP'  Thoi*as  P*or'  Su*d- 

[John  Langley  was  admitted  Mas-  EHas' Wrenehe  " 
ter  of  the  Cathedral  School,  March 

161|-,  as  appears  by  the  Acts  of  the  (The  other  Prebendaries  at  this  time 

Chapter  of  Gloucester.     In   1640   he  were  Laurence  Bridger,  William  Loe, 

was  elected  Master  of  S.  Paul's  School  and  Thomas  Anyan,  of  whom  Loe  and 

in  the  room  of  Alexander  Gill,  men-  Anyan  had  dispensations  of  absence.) 

tioncd  above,  p.  80,  note  f.]  On  the  17th  of  Jan.  an  order  was 

z  [The  following  is  the  entry  in  the  made    and  signed  by  Laud  and  the 

Act  Book  of  Gloucester  Chapter : —  same  three  Prebendaries  for  the  repair 

"  Acta,   habita,    et  facta  vicesimo  of  the  fabric. 

qui[nto]  die  Januarii  Anno  Dom.  1616  There  is  also  in  the  same  Act  Book 

[1617]  .  .  .  Quibus  die  et  anno  venera-  an  order  for  the  restoration  of  the 

bilis  vir  Decanus    antedictus    sacra-  early  prayers   in    the   Lady  Chapel, 

mentum  prsestitit  corporale.  .  .  .  signed  by  Laud,  Wrench,  and  Prior, 

"  Eodem  die  post  susceptum  Jura-  March  9,  1617;  and  on  the  13th  day 

mentum,  It  was  by  Mr.  Deane  and  the  of  the  same  month  a  letter  addressed 

Chapter  aforesaid  ordered  and  decreed,  by  the  same  three    persons  to  the 

that  the  communion  table  should  be  gentry  of  the  county,  requesting  their 


Die  Duo-    already  for  it,  out  of  the  Injunctions  of  Queen  Elizabeth. 
decimo.       He  say^  ,  ^^  ^s^o^  Smith  a  took  offence  at  this,  and  would 

come  no  more  to  the  cathedral/  First,  my  Lords,  this 
gentleman  was  then  schoolmaster  there,  and  had  free'  access 
unto  me:  he  never  discovered  this.  Secondly,  the  Bishop 
himself  never  said  a  word  to  me  about  it  :  if  he  had,  I  would 
either  have  satisfied  his  Lp.  in  that,  or  anything  else  that  I 
did  :  or  if  he  had  satisfied  me,  I  would  have  forborne  it  :  he 
says,  (  that  Mr.  Workman,  after  he  was  put  from  his  lecture, 
was  not  suffered  to  teach  children/  First,  if  he  had  been 
suffered,  this  man  had  been  like  to  make  the  first  complaint 
for  decay  of  his  own  school.  But  secondly,  the  commission 
thought  it  no  way  fit  to  trust  him  with  the  education  of 
children,  who  had  been  factious  among  men.  Especially  not 
in  that  place,  where  he  had  so  showed  himself.  "  And  this 
answer  I  gave  to  Mr.  Brown,  who  in  summing  the  evidence 
stood  as  much,  and  inveighed  as  earnestly  against  this  cruel 
proceeding  with  Mr.  Workman,  as  upon  any  one  thing  in 
the  charge.  At  which  time  he  added  also,  '  that  he  would 
not  be  suffered  to  practise  physic  to  get  his  living.  But 
first,  no  witness  evidenceth  this,  that  he  was  denied  to 
practise  physic.  And  secondly,  he  might  have  taught  a 
school,  or  practised  physic  anywhere  else.  But  he  had  done 
so  much  harm,  and  made  such  a  faction  in  Gloucester,  as 
that  the  High-Commission  thought  it  not  fit  to  continue  him 
there  ;  and  he  was  not  willing  to  go  from  thence,  where  he  had 
made  his  party  l."  He  says  further,  '  that  some  few  of  the 
citizens  of  Gloucester  were  called  into  the  High-Commission, 
for  an  annuity  of  twenty  pound  a  year  allowed  Mr.  Work 
man,  out  of  the  town  stock.'  For  the  thing  itself,  it  was  a 
gross  abuse  and  scorn  put  upon  that  court  ;  that  when  they 
had  censured  a  schismatical  lecturer  (for  such  he  was  there 

1  ['And  this  .  .  .  party.'  on  opposite  page.] 

aid  and  assistance  towards  the  erection  tracts  to  the  Kev.   Herbert  Haines, 

of  a  new  organ.  M.  A.,  Second  Master  of  the  Gloucester 

There  is  a  further  order  on  the  20th  Cathedral  School.] 

of  the  following  October,  relating  to  a  [Miles  Smith ;  Bp.  of  Gloucester, 

the  repairs  of  the  church,  and  direct-  1612 — 1624.     He  took  an  active  part 

ing  that  the  fees  for  burial  should  be  as  one  of  the  translators  of  the  Bible, 

applied  to  that  purpose.  and  wrote  the  Preface  which  is  pre- 

The  Editor  is  indebted  for  these  ex-  fixed  to  it.  (Wood,  Ath.  Ox.  ii.  350.)] 


proved)  the  townsmen  should  make  him  an  allowance  of  Die  Duo- 
twenty  pound  a  year.  A  thing  (as  I  humbly  conceive)  not  fit  decimo- 
to  be  endured  in  any  settled  *  government.  And  whereas  cla 
mour  is  made,  that  some  few  of  the  citizens  were  called  to  an 
account  for  it,  that's  as  strange  on  the  other  side.  For  where 
there  are  many  offenders,  the  noise  would  be  too  great  to 
333  call  all.  And  yet  here  's  noise  enough  made  for  calling  a 
few.  Here  it  was  replied  by  Mr.  Maynard,  '  that  this  was 
done  by  that  corporation,  and  yet  a  few  singled  out  to 
answer ;  and  that  therefore  I  might  be  singled  out  to  answer 
for  things  done  in  the  High-Commission/  "  But,  under 
favour,  this  learned  and  worthy  gentleman  is  mistaken.  For 
here  the  mayor  and  magistrates  of  Gloucester  did  that  which 
was  no  way  warrantable  by  their  charter,  in  which  case  they 
may  be  accountable,  all  or  some  :  but  in  the  High-Commission 
we  meddled  with  no  cause  not  cognoscible  there ;  or  if  by 
misinformation  we  did,  we  were  sure  of  a  prohibition  to  stop 
us.  And  meddling  with  nothing  but  things  proper  to  them, 
I  conceive  still,  no  one  man  can  be  singled  out  to  suffer  for 
that  which  was  done  by  all.  And  this  may  serve  to  answer 
Mr.  Brown  also,  who  in  his  last  reply  upon  me,  when  I 
might  not  answer,  made  use  of  it." 

2.  The  second  witness  was  Mr.  Purye  of  Gloucester  b.  He 
says,  '  that  Mr.  Brewster  and  Mr.  Guies  c  the  town-clerk, 
were  called  to  the  Council-table  about  this  annuity,  and  that 
I  desired  it  might  be  further  examined  at  the  High-Commis 
sion.  If  this  were  true,  I  know  no  offence  in  it,  to  desire  that 
such  an  affront  to  Government  might  be  more  thoroughly 
examined  than  the  Lds.  had  leisure  to  do.  But  the  witness 
doth  not  give  this  in  evidence.  For  he  says  no  more,  than 
'  that  he  heard  so  from  Mr,  Brewster/  And  this  hearsay  is 
no  conviction.  He  says  further,  '  that  the  High-Commission 
called  upon  this  business  of  the  annuity,  as  informed  that  the 
twenty  pound  given  to  Mr.  Workman,  was  taken  out  of  the 
monies  for  the  poor/  And  this  I  must  still  think  was  a  good 

i  [<  settled '  inserted  afterwards.] 

b  [Alderman  Thomas  Fury,  M.  P.  c  [Prynne  calls  them  '  Buckston' 
for  Gloucester  in  the  Long  Parlia-  and  '  Wise ;'  but  in  the  list  of  errata 
ment.J  corrects  the  latter  name  to  '  Guise.'] 


Die  Duo-  and  a  sufficient  ground,  justly  to  call  them  in  question.  He 
says  also,  '  that  these  men  were  fined,,  because  that  which 
they  did  was  against  authority/  So  by  their  own  witness  it 
appears,  that  they  were  not  fined  simply  for  allowing  means 
to  Mr.  Workman,  but  for  doing  it  in  opposition  to  authority. 
Lastly,  he  says,  '  they  were  (177)  fined  ten  pound  apiece,  and 
that  presently  taken  off  again/  So  here  was  no  such  great  per 
secution  as  is  made  in  the  cause.  And  for  the  cancelling  of 
this  deed  of  the  annuity,  it  was  done  by  themselves,  as  Mr. 
Langlye  witnesses ] . 

After  these  two  witnesses  heard,  the  sentence  of  the  High- 
Commission  Court  was  read,  which  I  could  not  have  come  at, 
had  not  they  produced  it.  And  by  that  it  appeared  evidently, 
that  Mr.  Workman  was  censured,  as  well  for  other  things  as 
for  his  sermon  about  images  in  churches.  As  first,  he  said, 
e  so  many  paces  in  dancing  were  so  many  to  hell/  This  was 
hard,  if  he  meant  the  measures  in  the  inns  of  court  at 
Christmas ;  and  he  excepted  none 2.  Then  he  said,  and  was 
no  way  able  to  prove  it,  '  that  drunkards,  so  they  were  con 
formable,  were  preferred/  Which  was  a  great  and  a  notorious 
slander  upon  the  governors  of  the  Church,  and  upon  orderly 
and  conformable  men.  Then  he  said,  ( that  election  of 
ministers  was  in  the  people/  And  this  is  directly  against 
the  laws  of  England,  in  the  right  of  all  patrons.  Then  con 
stantly  in  his  prayer  before  his  sermon,  '  he  prayed  for  the 
States  d  and  the  King  of  Sweden,  before  his  Majesty,'  which 
was  the  garb  of  that  time,  among  that  party  of  men.  Then, 
'  that  one  of  his  common  themes  of  preaching  to  the  people, 
was  against  the  Government  of  the  Church/  And  then, '  that 
images  in  churches  were  no  better  than  stews  in  the  Com-  334 
monwealth/  which  at  the  best  is  a  very  unsavoury  comparison. 
But  here  it  was  replied,  '  that  images  were  idols,  and  so 
called  in  the  Homilies e,  and  that  therefore  the  comparison 
might  hold/  Yea,  but  in  the  second  homily,  Against  the 
Peril  of  Idolatry,  images  or  pictures  in  glass  or  hangings  are 
expressly  and  truly  said  not  to  be  idols  till  they  be  worshipped f. 

1  ['And  for  ...  witnesses.'  on  opposite  page.] 

2  ['  and  he  excepted  none.'  in  margin.] 

d  [Of  Holland.]  p.  iii.  p.  92.  [p.  187.  Oxf.  1814.] 

e  Horn,  against  the  Peril  of  Idola.          f  .[P.  164.] 


And  therefore  Mr.  Workman  should  not  have  compared  their  Die  Duo- 
setting  up  to  stews,  till  he  could  have  proved  them  worshipped.  decimo- 
And  in  all  this,  were  the  act  good  or  bad  in  the  censuring  of 
him,  it  was  the  act  of  the  High- Commission,  not  mine. 

After  this  followed  the  fifth  charge,  which  was  Mr.  Sher-  V. 
feild's  case,  his  sentence  in  the  Star-chamber  for  defacing  of 
a  church -window  in  or  near  Salisbury  g.  The  witnesses  pro 
duced  were  two.  1.  The  first  was  Mr.  Carill11.  He  said  that 
Mr.  Sherfeild  defaced  this  window,  because  there  was  an 
image  in  it,  conceived  to  be  the  picture  of  God  the  Father. 
But  first,  this  comes  not  home.  For  many  a  picture  may  be 
conceived  to  be  of  God  the  Father,  which  yet  is  not,  nor  was 
ever  made  for  it.  And  then  suppose  it  were  so,  yet  Mr. 
Sherfeild  in  a  settled  government  of  a  State  ought  not  to 
have  done  it,  but  by  command  of  authority.  He  says,  that 
in  my  speech  there  in  the  court,  I  justified  the  having  of  the 
picture  of  God  the  Father,  as  he  remembers,  out  of  Dan. 
vii.  2.2  l.  This  '  as  he  remembers'  came  well  in.  For  I  never 
justified  the  making  or  having  that  picture.  ts  For  Calvin's 
rule,  'that  we  may  picture  that  which  may  be  seen*/  is 
grounded  upon  the  negative,  that  no  picture  may  be  made  of 
that  which  was  never,  never  can  be  seen.  And  to  ground 
this  negative,  is  the  command  given  by  Moses,  Deut.  iv. j 
'  Take  good  heed  to  yourselves/  For  what  ?  That  you  make 
not  to  yourselves  this  picture.  Why  ?  '  For  that  you  saw  no 
manner  of  similitude,  in  the  day  that  the  Lord  spake  unto 
you  out  of  the  midst  of  the  fire.'  Out  of  the  midst  of  the 
fire,  and  yet  He  still  reserved  himself  in  '  thick  darkness/ 
Exod.  xx.k  So  no  picture  of  Him,  because  no  similitude  ever 
seen.  And  this  rule  having  ever  possessed  me  wholly,  I 
could  not  justify  the  having  of  it.  I  said  indeed,  that  some 
men  in  later  superstitious  times,  were  so  foolish  as  to  picture 

1  ['out  of  Dan  vii.  22.'  in  margin.] 

e  [See  above,  p.  169,   note  b,   and  and  was  appointed  by  the  Parliament 

Prynne's  Cant.  Doom,  pp.  102,  103.  to  attend  the  King  at  the  scaffold.    A 

The  passages  of  the  speech  here  re-  list  of  his  works  are  given  by  Wood 

ferred  to  may  be  compared  with  the  (Ath.  Ox.  iii.  979—983).] 

speech  itself  in  vol.  vi.]  »    Calv.  1.  Instit.  c.  11,  §  12.  [Op., 

h  [Joseph  Caryll,  preacher  at  Lin-  torn.  ix.  p.  22.] 

coin's  Inn.     He  was  one  of  the  chap-  J  Deut.  iv.  15,  16. 

lains  to  the  commissioners  who  visited  k  Exod.  xx.  21. 
the  King  at  Holdenby  and  Newport, 


Die  Duo-  God  the  Father,  by  occasion  of  that  place  in  Daniel ;  but  for 
mo*  myself  I  ever  rejected  it.  Nor  can  that  place  bear  any  show 
of  it.  For  Daniel  says  there,  '  that  the  Ancient  of  days  came/ 
But  in  what  shape  or  similitude  He  came,  no  man  living  can 
tell.  And  He  is  called '  the  Ancient  of  days'  from  His  eternity, 
not  as  if  He  appeared  like  an  old  man.  The  text  hath  no 
warrant  at  all  for  that. 

2.  Yet  the  second  witness,  Mr.  Tomlyns1,  says  also,  'that 
I  did  justify  this  picture/  "  God  forgive  him  the  malice  or 
ignorance  of  this  oath,  be  it  which  it  will."  He  might  have 
been  as  wary  as  Mr.  Caril,  and  added  '  as  he  remembers ; ' 
for  so  many  years  since,  as  this  hearing  was,  he  may  easily 
mistake.  But  if  I  did  say  any  such  thing,  why  are  not  my 
own  papers  here  produced  against  me  ?  I  had  that  written 
which  I  then  spake,  and  the  paper  was  in  my  study  with  the 
rest,  and  came  (for  aught  I  know)  into  their  hands  which 
follow  the  charge  against  me.  I  ask  again,  why  is  not  this 
paper  produced?  Out  of  all  doubt  it  would,  had  there 
appeared  any  such  thing  in  it  \  He  says  also,  '  that  I  said 
then,  that  if  the  idol  of  Jupiter  were  set  up,  yet  it  were  not  335 
lawful  to  pull  it  down  in  a  popular  tu(178)mult,  but  by  order 
and  authority/  I  did  say  so,  or  to  that  effect,  indeed:  and 
must  say  it  still.  For  I  find  in  St.  Aug.  almost  the  very 
words  m.  And  Bishop  Davenant n,  a  man  very  learned,  cites 
this  place  of  St.  Aug.  and  approves  it.  And  they  both  prove 
this  doctrine  from  Deut.  xii.°  Where  the  command  given 
for  destroying  of  the  idols,  when  they  came  into  the  land  of 
Canaan,  was  not  left  at  large  to  the  people,  but  settled  in 
Moses  the  chief  magistrate,  and  his  power.  And  according 
to  this  rule,  the  temple  of  ^Esculapius,  though  then  grown 
very  scandalous,  was  not  pulled  down  but  by  Constantino's 
command  P.  Which  place  I  then  showed  the  Lords.  But 

1  [<  But  if ...  in  it.'  on  opposite  page.] 

1  [A  barrister  of  the  Temple.]  (al.  de  Verb.  Dom.  vi.)  §  17.  Op.,  t.  v. 

m  ["  Cum  acceperitis  potestatem,  hoc  col.  520.  C.  D.] 

facite.     Ubi  nobis  non  est  data  po-  n  [Exposit.  Epist.  D.  Pauli  ad  Co- 

testas,  non  facimus ;  ubi  data  est,  non  loss.   cap.  iv.   ver.  5.   p.  490.     Cant, 

prsetermittimus.   Multi  pagan i  habent  1627.] 

istas  abominationes  in    fundis  suis ;  °  Deut.  vii.  5,  and  xii.  2. 

numquid  accedimus,  et  confrangimus  ?  p  Euseb.  [lib.]  iii.  de  Vita  Constan. 

Prius  enim  agimus,  ut  idola  in  eorum  c.  54,  [cap.  56.  pp.  611,612.     Cant, 

corde  frangamus."— S.  Aug.Serm.  Ixii.  1720.] 


this  witness  added,  '  that  Mr.  Sherfeild  had  authority  to  do  Die  Duo- 
this  from  the  vestry.     If  he  had,  that 's  as  good  as  none ;  for   e 
by  the  laws  of  England  there  is  yet  no  power  given  them  for 
that  or  anything  else.     And  all  that  vestries  do,  is  by  usurpa 
tion  or  consent  of  the  parish,  but  reaches  not  this1.     The 
Bishop  of  the  diocese  had  been  fitter  to  be  consulted  herein, 
than  the  vestry. 

Here,  as  if  these  witnesses  had  not  said  enough,  Mr. 
Nicolas  offered  himself  to  be  a  witness.  And  told  the  Lords 
he  was  present  at  the  hearing  of  this  cause,  '  and  that  four 
witnesses  came  in  clear,  that  the  picture  broken  down,  was 
the  picture  of  God  the  Father,  and  that  yet  the  sentence  of 
the  court  passed  against  Mr.  Sherfeild/  First,  if  this  be  so, 
it  concludes  against  the  sentence  given  in  the  Star-chamber, 
not  against  me ;  and  he  calls  it  here  ( the  sentence  of  the 
court.'  Secondly,  be  it,  that  it  were  undoubtedly  the  picture 
of  God  the  Father ;  yet  he  ought  to  have  taken  authority 
along  with  him,  and  not  to  go  about  it  with  violence,  which 
he  did,  and  fell  and  brake  his  leg  in  the  business 2.  Thirdly, 
by  his  own  description  of  the  picture,  it  seems  to  me  to  be 
some  old  fabulous  picture  out  of  a  legend,  and  not  one  of 
God  the  Father  :  for  he  then  told  the  Lords,  '  it  was  a  pic 
ture  of  an  old  man  with  a  budget  by  his  side,  out  of  which 
he  was  plucking  Adam  and  Eve ; '  and  I  believe  no  man  ever 
saw  God  the  Father  so  pictured  anywhere.  "  Lastly,  let  me 
observe  how  Mr.  Nicolas  takes  all  parts  upon  him  wherein  he 
may  hope  to  do  me  mischief." 

The  sixth  charge  was  concerning  a  Bible,  that  was  printed  VI. 
with  pictures,  and  sold.  The  witness  Mr.  Walsal  ^  a  stationer. 
Who  says,  '  that  this  Bible  was  licensed  by  Dr.  Weeks  r  /  my 
Ld.  of  London's  Chaplain,  not  mine ;  so  thus  far  it  concerns 
not  me.  "  Yes,  says  Mr.  Brown  in  his  last  reply :  '  For  it 
appears  in  a  list  of  my  chaplains  under  my  own  hand,  that 
Dr.  Weeks  was  one. '  'Tis  true,  when  I  was  Bp.  of  Bath  and 

1  ['  or  consent  .  .  .  this.'  in  margin.] 

2  ['  which  he  ...  business.'  in  margin.] 

i  [Walley,  the  clerk  of  Stationer's  Rector  of  Banwell,  March  4,  16£§,  and 

Hall.  (Prynne,  Cant.  Doom,  p.  109.)]  afterwards  Dean  of  S.  Buryanin  Corn- 

r  [John  Weekes  was  installed  Pre-  wall  (Wood,  F.  0.  ii.  68).  Prynne 

bendary  of  the  third  stall  in  Bristol  states  that  these  pictures  were  licensed 

Cathedral,  March  3,  1633,  (Le  Neve,)  not  by  Weekes,  but  by  Dr.  Bray.] 


Die  Duo-  Wells  he  was  mine ;  but  my  Ld.  of  London  had  him  from 
me,  so  soon  as  ever  he  was  Bishop.  And  was  his,  not  mine, 
when  he  licensed  that  book.  And  Mr.  Brown  knew  that  I 
answered  it  thus  to  the  Lords."  He  says,  '  that  I  gave  him 
direction  that  they  should  not  be  sold  openly  upon  the  stalls, 
but  only  to  discreet  men  that  knew  how  to  use  them/  The  case 
was  this.  As  I  was  at  prayers  in  the  King's  chapel,  I  there 
saw  one  of  them  in  Mrs.  Kirk's  hand.  She  was  far  enough 
from  any  affection  to  Rome.  And  this  being  the  first  know 
ledge  I  had  of  it,  many  were  vented  and  sold  before  I  could 
prevent  it.  Upon  this  I  sent  for  one  (whether  to  this  witness 
or  another  I  cannot  say),  and  acquainted  the  Lords  of  the 
Council  with  it,  and  craved  their  direction  what  should  be  336 
done.  It  was  there  ordered,  that  I  should  forbid  the  open 
sale  of  them  upon  their  stalls,  but  not  otherwise  to  learned 
and  discreet  men.  And  when  I  would  have  had  this  order 
stricter,  no  man  stuck  to  me  but  Mr.  Secretary  Cook.  So 
according  to  this  order  I  gave  direction  to  Mr.  Walsal,  as  he 

Here  Mr.  Maynard  replied,  that  I  ought  to  have  withstood 
this  order,  in  regard  it  was  every  way  faulty.  For,  said  he, 
'  either  these  pictures  were  good,  or  bad.  And  if  they  were 
good,  why  should  they  not  be  sold  openly  upon  the  stalls  to 
all  that  would  buy  ?  And  if  they  were  bad,  why  should  they 
be  sold  privately  to  any  ?'  "To  this  reply  I  was  not  suffered 
to  answer  :  but  when  I  heard  Mr.  Brown  charge  this  Bible 
with  pictures  against  me,  then  I  answered  the  thing  as  before, 
and  took  occasion  thereby  to  answer  this  dilemma  thus. 
Namely,  that  this  kind  of  argument  concludes  not,  but  in 
things  necessary,  and  where  no  medium  can  be  given.  For 
where  a  medium  can  be  given,  the  horns  of  this  argument 
are  too  weak  to  hurt.  And  so  -'tis  here.  For  pictures  in 
themselves  are  things  indifferent;  not  simply  good,  nor 
simply  bad,  but  as  they  are  used.  And  therefore  they  were 
not  to  be  sold  to  all  comers,  because  they  may  be  abused, 
and  become  evil ;  and  yet  might  be  sold  to  learned  and  dis 
creet  men,  who  might  turn  them  to  good.  And  that  images 
are  things  indifferent  of  themselves,  is  granted  in  the  homilies 
which  are  against  the  very  Peril  of  Idolatry8."  He  said, 
*  Horn,  par.i.  p.  11.  [p.  155.] 


<  there  was  some  inconvenient  pictures  among  them ;  as  the  Die  Duo- 
Assumption,  and  the  Dove/  Be  it  so,  the  book  was  not  decimo- 
licensed  by  me  or  mine.  And  yet,  as  I  then  showed  the 
Lords,  they  were  not  so  strict  at  Amsterdam  against  these 
pictures.  For  the  book  which  Mr.  Walsal  showed  me,  was 
printed  and  sent  thence,  before  it  was  printed  here.  Besides, 
our  old  English  Bibles  in  the  beginning  of  the  Queen  were 
full  of  pictures ;  and  no  fault  found.  As  for  that  which  is 
added  at  the  bar,  '  that  one  of  these  Bibles  was  found  in 
Secretary  Windebank's  trunk,  and  another  in  Sir  Jo.  Lamb's ;' 
that 's  nothing  to  me. 

The  last  charge  of  this  day  was,  '  that  something  about 
images  was  expunged  out  of  Dr.  Featly's  l  sermons,  by  my 
chaplain,  Dr.  Bray,  before  they  could  be  suffered  to  be 
printed  V  But  first,  he  himself  confesses,  that  I  told  him  he 
might  print  them,  so  nothing  were  in  them  contrary  to  the 
doctrine  and  discipline  of  the  Church  of  England.  Secondly, 
he  confesses,  that  when  Dr.  Bray  made  stay  of  them,  he 
never  complained  to  me ;  and  I  cannot  remedy  that  which  I 
do  not  know.  Thirdly,  he  confesses,  that  all  the  time  he 
was  in  Lambeth-House,  my  predecessor  ever  left  that  care  of 
the  press  upon  his  chaplains  ;  and  why  I  might  not  do  it  as 
well  as  my  predecessor,  I  do  not  yet  know.  But  he  said, 
'  that  he  complained  to  Sir  Edmund  Scott,  and  desired  to  be 
advised  by  him  what  he  should  do :  and  that  he  answered, 
he  thought  I  would  not  meddle  with  that  troublesome  busi 
ness,  more  than  my  predecessors  had  done.'  "  Be  this  so, 
yet  Sir  Ed.  Scott  never  told  me  this ;  nor  is  there  any  the 
least  proof  offered  that  he  did.  But  because  this  and  the  like 
passages  about  expunging  some  things  out  of  books,  makes 
such  a  great  noise,  as  if  nothing  concerning  popery  might  be 
printed :  and  because  Mr.  Brown  in  summing  up  of  the 
charge  in  the  House  of  Commons,  warmly  insisted  upon  this 
337  particular,  I  thought  it  necessary  to  answer  as  follows.  That 
what  moved  my  chaplain  to  expunge  that  large  passage 
against  images,  I  knew  not ;  nor  could  I  now  know,  my 

1  ['Dr.  Featly's'  in  margin;  originally  'his'] 

'  [The  passage  said  to  have  been      788,  is  given  by  Prynnc,  Cant.  Doom, 
erased  from  Dr.  Featley's  Sermons,  p.      pp.  108,  109.] 

LAUP. — VOL.  IV. 


Die  Duo-  chaplain  being  dead  u.  But  that  this  I  was  sure  of,  that  else- 
decimo.  w]iere  in  those  very  sermons,  there  was  as  plain  a  passage, 
and  full  against  images,  left  inx.  And  in  another  place  a 
whole  leaf  together,  spent  to  prove  them  idolaters  >T;  and 
that  as  gross  as  the  Baalists,  and  so  he  terms  them.  Yea, 
and  that  the  Pope  is  Antichrist  too z,  and  not  only  called  so, 
but  proved  by  divers  arguments.  And  not  so  only,  but  in 
plain  terms,  that  he  is  the  whore  of  Babylon  a.  And  these 
passages  I  then  read  out  of  the  book  itself  in  the  House  of 
Commons.  And  many  other  like  to  these  there  are.  So  my 
chaplain  might  see  good  cause  to  leave  out  some  passages. 
Where  so  many  upon  as  good  cause  were  left  in." 

But  to  the  business  of  leaving  the  care  of  these  books,  and 
the  overview  of  them,  to  my  chaplains,  it  was  then  urged, 
'  That  the  commissary  of  John  Ld.  Archbp.  of  York,  had 
excommunicated  the  Ld.  Bp.  of  Durham,  being  then  in  the 
King's  service.  And  that  the  Archbp.  himself  wras  deeply 
fined  for  this  act  of  his  commissary  b.  And  that  therefore  I 
ought  much  more  to  be  answerable  for  my  chaplain's  act, 
whom  I  might  put  away  when  I  would,  than  he  for  his  com 
missary,  who  had  a  patent,  and  could  not  be  put  out  at 
pleasure0.'  Mr.  Brown  also  followed  this  precedent  close 
upon  me.  But  first,  there  is  a  great  deal  of  difference  in  the 
thing  itself :  my  chaplain' s  case  being  but  the  leaving  out  of 
a  passage  in  a  book  to  be  printed :  but  his  commissary's 
case  being  the  excommunicating  of  a  great  bishop,  and  he  in 
the  King's  service,  of  whose  honour  the  laws  of  this  realm 
are  very  tender.  And  secondly,  the  Bp.  and  his  official 
(call  him  chancellor  or  commissary,  or  what  you  will)  make 
but  one  person  in  law ;  and  therefore  the  act  of  the  com 
missary  to  the  full  extent  of  his  patent,  is  the  act  of  the 
Bishop  in  legal  construction,  and  the  Bishop  may  be  answer- 

u  [Dr.  Bray  had  died  early  in  this  revocable  at  the  pleasure  of  the  Bishop. 

year.]  H.  W. 

*  Dr.    Featly's     Sermons,     [Clavis          c  [This  case  is  mentioned  by  Prynne 

Mystica,]  p.  477.     [See  also,  pp.  787,  (Cant.  Doom,  p.  517).     The  circum- 

788.  Lond.  1636.]  stance  took  place  in  21  Edw.  I.  1292, 

-v  [Senn.  Ivii.]  p.  791.  1293.     The  Abp.  of  York  at  that  time 

z  [Serm.  lx.]  p.  808.  was  John   Romain,  and   the   Bp.  of 

a  [Ibid.]  p.  810.  Durham,  Anthony  Beck.   The  Bishop 

'   This  was  done  long  before  the  of   Durham's  servants,   not    himself, 

Reformation;   when    the    patents  of  were  excommunicated.] 

Chancellors  and  Commissaries  were 


able  for  it.     But  the  Bp.  and  his  chaplain  are  not  one  person  Die  Duo- 
in  any  construction  of  law.     "  And  say  he  may  put  away  his  decimo> 
chaplain  when  he  will,  yet  that  cannot  help  what  is  past,  if 
aught  have  been  done  amiss  by  him.     And  this  was  the 
answer  I  insisted  on  to  Mr.  Brown  V 

Upon  my  entrance  on  this  day's  defence,  I  found  myself 
aggrieved  at  the  Diurnal,  and  another  pamphlet  of  the  week, 
wherein  they  print  whatsoever  is  charged  against  me,  as  if  it 
were  fully  proved;  never  so  much  as  mentioning  what,  or 
how  I  answered.  And  that  it  troubled  me  the  more,  because 
(as  I  conceived)  the  passages  as  there  expressed,  trenched 
deep  upon  the  justice  and  proceedings  of  that  honourable 
House.  And  could  have  no  aim  but  to  incense  the  multitude 
against  me.  With  some  difficulty  I  got  these  pamphlets  re 
ceived,  but  there  they  died,  and  the  weekly  abuse  of  me 
continued  to  keep  my  patience  in  breath. 

1  [The  whole  of  this  paragraph  is  written  on  an  inserted  slip  of  paper.] 

li  2 






I.  THE  first  charge  of  this  day,  was  the  opinion  which  was 
Junii  11,  held  of  me  beyond  the  seas.  The  first  witness  was  Sir 
Whitsun-  Henry  Mildmaye,  who  (as  is  before  related)  a  told  me  with- 
Tuesday.  out  asking,  that  (180)  I  was  the  most  hateful  man  at  Rome, 
mo-tertio.  that  ever  sate  in  my  see  since  the  Reformation.  Now  he 
denied  not  this,  "  but  being  helped  on  by  good  preparation, 
a  flexible  conscience,  and  a  fair  leading  interrogatory  by  Mr. 
Nicolas,"  (Mr.  Sergeant  Wilde  was  sick,  and  came  no  more 
till  the  last  day  when  I  made  my  recapitulation J)  he  minced 
it.  And  now  he  says,  that  '  there  were  two  factions  at  Rome, 
and  that  one  of  them  did  indeed  speak  very  ill  of  me,  because 
they  thought  I  aimed  at  too  great  a  power  here  in  England ; 
but  the  other  faction  spake  as  well  of  me,  because  they 
thought  I  endeavoured  to  bring  us  in  England  nearer  to  the 
Church  of  Rome/  But  first,  my  Lords,  this  gentleman's 
words  to  me  were  round  and  general :  '  That  I  was  hated  at 
Rome;  not  of  a  party,  or  faction  there.'  And  my  servants 
heard  him  at  the  same  time,  and  are  here  ready  to  witness  it, 
'  that  he  then  said  the  Pope  was  a  goodly  gentleman,  and  did 
use  to  ride  two  or  three  great  horses  in  a  morning,  and,  but 
that  he  was  something  taller,  he  was  as  like  Auditor  Philips 
(who  was  then  at  dinner  with  me)  as  could  be/  But  I  pray 
mark  what  wise  men  he  makes  them  at  Rome :  one  faction 
hates  me,  because  I  aim  at  too  much  power :  and  the  other 
loves  me,  because  I  would  draw  England  nearer  Rome ;  why, 
if  I  went  about  to  draw  England  nearer  Rome,  can  any 
among  them  be  such  fools  as  to  think  my  power  too  great? 
For  if  I  used  my  power  for  them,  why  should  any  there 

1  ['  Mr.  Sergeant .  .  .  recapitulation, '  in  margin.] 

a  [See  above,   p.  207.     Sir  Henry 
Mildmay's    evidence     is    given     by 

Prynne,  Cant.  Doom,  pp.  412,  413.] 


condemn  me  ?     And  if  I  used  it  against  them,  why  should  Die  Deei- 
any  here  accuse  me  1  ?     "  Non  sunt  JKEC  bene  divisa  tempo-  mo"ter  10* 
ribusb.     These  things  suit  not  with  the  times,  or  the  dis 
positions  of  Rome :  but  the  plain  truth  is,  I  do  not  think 
that  ever  he  was  at  Rome ;  I  after  heard  a  whisper,  that  he 
only  stepped  into  France  for  another  cure,  not  to  Rome  for 
curiosity,  which  was  the  only  cause  he  gave  the  Lords  of  his 
going  thither." 

2.  The  second  witness  was  Mr.  Challoner c.  He  says  not 
much  of  his  own  knowledge,  but  of  fame,  that  tattling  gossip ; 
yet  he  told  the  Lords,  '  I  was  a  very  obscure  man,  till  within 
these  fifteen  years/  Be  it  so,  if  he  please.  Yet  I  have  been 
a  Bishop  above  three  and  twenty  years  d  :  and  'tis  eighteen 
years  since  I  was  first  Dean  of  his  Majesty's  Chapel  Royal6. 
He  says,  '  that  after  this  time  there  was  a  strong  opinion  of 
reconciliation  to  Rome/  A  strong  opinion,  but  a  weak  proof. 
For  it  was  an  opinion  of  enemies,  and  such  as  could  easily 
believe,  what  they  overmuch  desired.  He  further  said,  'that 
some  of  them  were  of  opinion,  that  I  was  a  good  Roman 
Catholic,  and  that  I  wrought  cunningly  to  introduce  that 
339  religion  by  inches  :  and  that  they  prayed  for  me/  First,  my 
Lords,  the  opinion  of  enemies  is  no  proof  at  all,  that  I  am 
such  as  they  think  me.  And  secondly,  this  is  a  notable,  and 
no  unusual  piece  of  cunning,  for  an  enemy  to  destroy  by 
commending.  For  this  was  the  ready  way,  and  I  doubt  not 
but  it  hath  been  practised,  to  raise  a  jealousy  against  me  at 
home,  thereby  either  to  work  the  ruin  of  my  person,  or 
utterly  to  weaken  and  disable  me  from  doing  harm  to  them, 
or  good  for  the  Church  of  England.  Besides,  if  the  com 
mendation  of  enemies  may  in  this  kind  go  for  proof;  it  shall 
be  in  the  power  of  two  or  three  practising  Jesuits,  to  destroy 
any  bishop  or  other  churchman  of  England  when  they  please. 
At  last,  '  he  told  a  story  of  one  father  John,  a  Benedictine ; 
that  he  asked  him  how  church-livings  were  disposed  in 

1  ['  For  if ...  accuse  me]'  in  margin.] 

»  [Ter.  Andr.  iii.  1.  18.]  p.  136.1)] 

c  [See    his    evidence   in   Prynne's  e  [He  was  appointed  Oct.  3,  1626, 

Cant.  Doom,  pp.  414,  415.]  on  the  death  of  Bp.  Andrewes.  (Works, 

d  [He  was  appointed  Bp.  of  St.  Da-  vol.  iii.  p.  196.)] 
vid's  June  29,  1621.    (Works,  vol.  iii. 


Die  Deci-  England,  and  whether  I  had  not  the  disposing  of  those  which 
tio.  were  in  the  King's  gift.  And  concluded,  that  he  was  not  out 
of  hope  to  see  England  reduced  to  Rome/  Why,  my  Lords, 
this  is  not  Father  John's  hope  alone :  for  there  is  no  Roman 
Catholic  f  but  hath  some  hope  alive  in  him  to  see  this  day. 
And  were  it  not  for  that  hope,  there  would  not  have  been  so 
many,  some  desperate,  all  dangerous  practices  upon  this 
kingdom  to  effect  it,  both  in  Queen  Elizabeth's  time,  and 
since.  But  if  this,  I  know  not  what,  Father  John  hope  so, 
what  is  that  to  me  ? 

3.  The  third  witness  was  Mr.  Anthony  Mildmaye  %.  A  man 
not  thought  on  for  a  witness,  till  I  called  for  his  brother  Sir 
Henry.  But  now  he  comes  laden  with  his  brother's  language. 
He  says  just  as  Sir  Henry  did  before,  '  that  there  were  two 
factions  in  Rome,  the  Jesuits,  and  they  abhorred  me;  but 
the  other,  the  secular  priests,  they  wished  me  well,  as  he  was 
informed/  First,  this  is  so  one  and  the  same  testimony, 
that  any  man  that  will  may  see,  that  either  he  informed  his 
brother,  or  his  brother  (181)  him.  Secondly,  here's  nothing 
affirmed ;  for  it  is  but  '  as  he  was  informed/  And  he  doth 
not  tell  you  by  whom.  It  may  be,  my  Lords,  it  was  by  his 
brother.  Then  he  says,  '  this  was  to  make  myself  great/  and 
tells  a  tale  of  Father  Fitton  h,  as  much  to  the  purpose  as  that 
which  Mr.  Challoner  told  of  Father  John.  But  whatsoever 
either  of  these  fathers  said,  it  was  but  their  own  opinion  of 
me,  or  hearsay ;  neither  of  which  can  prove  me  guilty  of  any 
thing.  "  Thus  much  Mr.  Anthony  made  a  shift  to  say  by 
five  of  the  clock  at  afternoon,  when  I  came  to  make  my 
answer.  And  this  (as  I  have  sufficient  cause  to  think)  only 
to  help  to  shore  up  his  brother's  testimony.  But  in  the 
morning,  when  he  should  have  come,  as  his  brother  did,  he 
was  by  nine  in  the  morning  so  drunk,  that  he  was  not  able 
to  come  to  the  bar,  nor  to  speak  common  sense,  had  he  been 
brought  thither.  Nobile  par  fratrum i." 
II.  The  second  charge  was  the  (  consecration  of  two  churches 

£  The  Archbishop  calls  the  English  s  [See  his    evidence    in    Prynne's 

Papists  '  Roman  Catholics,'  not  as  al-  Cant.  Doom,  p.  413.] 

lowing  them  to  be  such ;  but  referring  h  [Agent  for  the  secular  priests  at 

to  that  name  which  some  of  them  were  Rome.] 

before  said  to  have  affixed  to  him.—  !  [Hor.  Sat.  ii.  3.  243.] 
H.  W. 


in  London  :'  St.  Catherine  Cree  church  k,  and  St.  Giles  in  the  Die  Deci- 
Fields.     The  witnesses  two. 

1.  The  first  witness  was  one  Mr.  Willingham.  And  he 
says,  '  that  I  came  to  these  churches  in  a  pompous  manner :' 
but  all  the  pomp  that  he  mentions  is,  that  Sir  Henry  Martin, 
Dr.  Duck,  and  some  other  of  the  Arches  attended  me,  as  they 
340  usually  do  their  Diocesans  in  such  solemnities.  He  says, 
'  he  did  curiously  observe  what  was  done,  thinking  it  would 
one  day  be  called  to  account,  as  now  it  is.'  So  this  man 
(himself  being  judge)  looked  upon  that  work  with  a  malevolent 
eye,  and  God  preserve  him  from  being  a  malicious  witness. 
He  says,  that  at  my  approach  to  the  church  door,  was  read, 
'  Lift  up  your  heads,  O  ye  gates,  and  be  ye  lift  up,  ye  ever 
lasting  doors,  and  the  King  of  Glory  shall  come  in  V  Psal. 
xxiv.  And  this  was  urged  over  and  over  as  a  jeer  upon  my 
person.  But  this  place  of  Scripture  hath  been  anciently 
used  in  consecrations.  And  it  relates  not  to  the  Bp.,  but  to 
God  Almighty,  the  true  King  of  Glory,  who  at  the  dedication 
enters  by  His  servant  to  take  possession  of  the  house,  then  to 
be  made^His.  He  says,  '  that  I  kneeled  down  at  my  coming 
in,  and  after  used  many  bowings  and  cringings.'  For  my 
kneeling  down  at  my  entrance,  to  begin  with  prayer,  and 
after  to  proceed  with  reverence,  I  did  but  my  duty  in  that, 
let  him  scoffingly  call  it  '  cringing,'  or  '  ducking/  or  what 
he  please. 

He  says  further,  '  that  at  the  beginning  I  took  up  dust, 
and  threw  it  in  the  air,  and  after  used  divers  curses/  And 
here  Mr.  Pryn  put  Mr.  Nicolas  in  mind  to  add,  '  that  spar (/ere 
cinerem  is  in  the  form  of  consecration  used  in  the  Pontifical.' 
"  And  Mr.  Brown,  in  his  summary  account  of  my  charge, 
laid  the  very  consecration  of  these  churches  as  a  crime  upon 
me ;  and  insisted  on  this  particular."  But  here  my  answer 
to  all  was  the  same  :  that  this  witness  had  need  look  well  to 
his  oath ;  for  there  was  no  throwing  up  of  dust,  no  curses 
used  throughout  the  whole  action:  nor  did  I  follow  the 
'  Pontifical,'  but  a  copy  of  learned  and  reverend  Bp.  Andrews  m, 
by  which  he  consecrated  divers  churches  in  his  time  :  and 
that  this  is  so,  I  have  the  copy  by  me  to  witness,  and  offered 

k  [See  Prynne's  burlesque  account          1  Psal.  xxiv.  7. 

of  this  consecration,  Cant.  Doom,  pp.          m  [See  Bp.  Andrewes'  Miscellaneous 
113  seq.]  Works,  pp.  307  seq.] 


Die  Deci-  them  to  show  it.  Nor  can  this  howsoever  savour  any  way  of 
t10'  treason.  "  No,  said  Mr.  Brown,  '  but  the  treason  is,  to  seek, 
by  these  ceremonies,  to  overthrow  the  religion  established/ 
Nor  was  that  ever  sought  by  me  :  and  God  of  His  mercy 
preserve  the  true  Protestant  religion  amongst  us,  till  the 
consecration  of  churches,  and  reverence  in  the  church,  can 
overthrow  it ;  and  then  I  doubt  not,  but  by  God's  blessing, 
it  shall  continue  safe  to  the  world's  end." 

He  says  also,  '  that  I  did  pronounce  the  place  holy.'  I  did 
so  :  and  that  was  in  the  solemn  act  itself  of  the  consecration, 
according  to  the  usual  form  in  that  behalf.  And  no  man  will 
deny,  but  that  there  '  is  a  derivative  and  a  relative  holiness  n> 
in  places,  as  well  as  in  vessels,  and  other  things  dedicated  to 
the  honour  and  service  of  God.  Nor  is  anything  more  com 
mon  in  the  Old  Testament ;  and  'tis  express  in  the  New  both 
for  place  and  things  °.  1  Cor.  ix. 

Then  it  was  urged  at  the  bar,  '  that  a  prayer  which  I  used, 
was  like  one  that  is  in  the  Pontifical/  So  in  the  Missal  are 
many  prayers  like  to  the  Collects  used  in  our  English  Liturgy, 
so  like,  that  some  are  the  very  same,  translated  only  into 
English ;  and  yet  these  confirmed  by  law.  And  for  that  of 
Psal.  xcv.  Venite  (182)  procidamus  P,  &c.,  then  also  excepted 
against ',  that  hath  been  Fof  very  ancient  use  in  the  Liturgies 
of  the  Church.  From  which,  rejecimus  paleam,  numquid  et 
(jrana  ?  '  we  have  separated  the  chaff,  shall  we  cast  away  the 
corn  too  ?'  If  it  come  to  that,  let  us  take  heed  we  fall  not 
upon  the  devil's  winnowing,  who  labours  to  beat  down  the 
corn ;  'tis  not  the  chaff  that  troubles  him**,  S.  Luc.  xxii.  Then  341 
they  urged  my  predecessor,  Archbp.  Parker r,  '  that  he  found 
fault  with  the  consecration  of  new  churches/  I  answered 
then  upon  memory,  that  he  did  not  find  fault  simply  with 
consecrations  of  churches,  but  only  with  the  superstitious 
ceremonies  used  therein.  "  And  this  since,  upon  perusal  of 

1  ['  then  also  excepted  against/  in  margin.] 

"  "  Objectiva  et  adhserens."  Jo.  Pri-  holiness,  adherent  to  it.'] 

deaux,   Concio,   in    S.  Luc.  xix.  46.  °  1  Cor.  ix.  13. 

[This  sermon  was  preached    at  the  P  Psal.  xcv.  6. 

consecration  of  Exeter  College  chapel.  i  S,  Luc.  xxii.  31. 

It  was  first  printed  in  1625,  and  re-  r  In  Antiq.  Britannicis,  p.  85.  [This 

printed   in   his    "Twenty   Sermons."  passage  is  given  in  full  by  Wharton 

Oxon.  1636.     Prideaux's  words  (p.  24  in  the  Appendix.] 
of  this  latter  Edition)  are,  '  objective 

01?  ARCHBISHOP  LAUD.  249 

the  place,  I  find  to  be  true.     For  after  he  had  in  some  sort  Die  Deci- 
commended  the  popes  for  taking  away  some  gross  and  super-  mo"te 
stitious  purgations,  he  adds,,  that  yet  for  want  of  piety,  or 
prudence,  their  later  Pontifical  and  Missal-books  did  outgo 
the  ancient  in  multitudine  ceremoniarum,  et  peragendi  difficul- 
tate,  et  tcedio,  et  exorcisationis  amentia.     So  these  were  the 
things  he  found  fault  with,  not  the  consecration  itself;  which 
he  could  not  well  do,  himself  being  then  a  consecrated  bishop." 

2.  The  second  witness  was  Mr.  Hope.  He  says,  'that  he 
agrees  with  the  former  witness,  and  saw  all,  and  the  throwing 
up  of  the  dust,'  &c.  Since  he  agrees  with  the  former  witness, 
I  give  him  the  same  answer.  Yet  with  this  observation  upon 
him  and  his  oath.  The  former  witness  says  that  '  at  the 
beginning  of  this  action '  I  took  dust  and  threw  it  up  :  this 
man  agrees  with  him,  and  saw  all ;  and  almost  in  the  very 
next  words  confesses,  '  he  was  not  there  at  the  beginning/ 
Not  there :  yet  he  saw  it.  My  Lords,  if  you  mark  it,  this  is 
a  wholesome  oath.  He  says,  '  that  then  the  churchyard  was 
consecrated  by  itself/  It  was  ever  so;  the  one  act  must 
follow  the  other,  though  both  done  the  same  day  :  for  the 
places  being  different,  the  act  could  not  pass  upon  them  at 
the  same  time.  Then  he  said,  '  there  were  fees  required,  and 
a  good  eye  had  to  the  money/  This  is  a  poor  objection 
against  me  :  if  the  officers  did  exact  any  money  without  rule, 
or  beyond  precedent,  let  them  answer  for  it.  But  for  that 
which  was  said  to  belong  to  me,  I  presently  gave  it  to  the 
poor  of  the  parish.  And  this  Mr.  Dell,  my  secretary,  then 
present,  attested  to  the  Lords.  Lastly,  he  said,  '  they  were 
not  new  churches/  Let  him  look  to  his  oath  again;  for  'tis 
notoriously  known,  they  were  both  new-built  from  the  ground ; 
and  St.  Giles  not  wholly  upon  the  old  foundation. 

The  third  charge  was  laid  on  me  only  by  Mr.  Nicolas,  and  III. 
without  any  witness.  It  was,  '  that  I  outwent  Popery  itself; 
for  the  Papists  consecrated  churches  only,  but  I  had  been  so 
ceremonious  that  I  had  consecrated  chapels  too s/  My  Lords, 
the  use  of  chapels  and  of  churches  in  regard  of  God's  service 
is  the  same.  Therefore,  if  consecration  be  fit  for  the  one,  it 

•  Here  in  England,  both  before  and  time   preceding,   many  of  the  time 

since  the  Reformation,  chapels  newly  succeeding  the  Reformation.  —  H.  W. 

erected  were  always  solemnly  conse-  [Dulwich  College  Chapel,  e.g.  by  Abp. 

crated,  as  well  as  churches.     I  could  Abbot.     See  Wilkins'  Cone.  torn.  iv. 

produce  innumerable  instances  of  the  pp.  555  scq.J 


Die  Deci-  must  needs  be  for  the  other.  And  the  consecrations  of 
t10'  chapels  was  long  before  Popery  came  into  the  world.  For 
even  oratories  newly  built  were  consecrated  in  or  before 
Eusebius  his  time*.  And  he  nourished  about  the  year  of 
Christ  310.  So  ancient  they  are  in  the  course  of  Christianity; 
and  for  any  prohibition  of  them,  there  is  neither  law  nor 
canon  in  the  State  or  Church  of  England  that  doth  it. 

The  chapels  they  instance  in  are  three.  1.  First,  they 
say,  'I  consecrated  a  chapel  of  the  Eight  Honourable  the 
Ld.  Treasurer  Weston's  V  I  did  so,  and  did  no  harm  therein. 
As  for  the  touch  given  by  the  way  upon  that  honourable  342 
person,  he  is  gone  to  Godx,  I  have  nothing  to  do  with  it. 
2.  Secondly,  they  instanced  '  in  a  chapel  of  Sir  John 
Worstenhanr's  building  y/  'Tis  true  I  consecrated  that  too  \ 
but  that  was  a  parish  church,  built  in  the  place  where  he 
was  born,  and  it  was  in  my  diocese,  and  so  the  work  proper 
for  me.  3.  The  third  instance  was  in  my  own  chapel,  in  my 
house  at  Aberguilly  z,  when  I  was  Bishop  of  S.  David's.  The 
room  lay  waste  and  out  of  repair,  and  I  fitted  it  at  my  own 
cost,  and  consecrated  it  into  a  chapel,  that  house  having  no 
oratory  before.  1.  Here  they  further  aggravated  many  cir 
cumstances  :  as  first,  that  I  named  it  at  the  dedication  '  the 
Chapel  of  S.  John  the  Baptist/  I  did  so  name  that  chapel, 
in  memory  of  the  college  where  I  was  bred,  which  bears  the 
same  name  ;  but  I  dedicated  it  to  God  and  His  service.  And 
(1  83)  to  give  the  names  of  angels  and  saints  to  churches,  for 
distinction  sake,  and  for  the  honour  of  their  memory,  is  very 
ancient  and  usual  in  the  Church,  as  appears  in  S.  Aug.a,  and 
divers  others  of  the  Fathers  ;  but  dedicated  only  to  God  : 
"  which,  in  the  midst  of  superstitious  times,  the  School  itself 
confesses  b  :"  so  yet  no  offence.  2.  Secondly,  '  that  I  did  it 
upon  the  29th  of  August/  And  why  might  I  not  do  it  that 
day,  as  well  as  upon  any  other  ?  But  resolving  to  name  the 
chapel  as  I  did,  I  the  rather  made  choice  of  that  day,  both 
because  it  was  the  day  of  the  decollation  of  S.  John  the 

1  Euseb.  lib.  x.  Hisfc.  c.  3.  [pp.  463  z  [See  Diary,  Aug.  28,  1625,  ibid. 

—465.]  p.  171.] 

u  [See  Diary,  May  16,  1632,  vol.  iii.  a  [S.  Aug.  de  Civit.  Dei,  lib.  xxii. 

p.  215.]  cap.  10.  Op.,  torn.  vii.  col.  1073.  C.] 

x  [He  died  in  1634.]  *  [S.]  Tho.  [Aquin.  Summ.  Theol.] 

y  [See  Diary,  July  17,  1632,  vol.  iii.  2.  2se.  q.  Ixxxv.  A.  2  ad  3. 
p.  216.1 


Baptist ;  and  because,  as  upon  that  day  God  had  wonderfully  Die  Deci- 
blessed  me,  in  the  hearing  of  my  cause  concerning  the  Presi-  m 
dentship  of  S.  John's  College  in  Oxford,  by  King  James  of 
ever  blessed  memory c :  so  yet  no  offence.  3.  Thirdly,  there 
was  a  paper  read,  '  and  avowed  to  be  mine,  in  which  was  a 
fair  description  of  chapel  furniture,  and  rich  plate,  and  the 
ceremonies  in  use  in  that  chapel,  and  wafers  for  the  Commu 
nion/  At  the  reading  of  this  paper  I  was  a  little  troubled. 
I  knew  I  was  not  then  so  rich  as  to  have  such  plate,  or 
furniture ;  and  therefore  I  humbly  desired  sight  of  the  paper. 
So  soon  as  I  saw  it,  I  found  there  was  nothing  in  it  in  my 
hand  but  the  indorsement,  which  told  the  reader  plainly  that 
it  was  the  model  of  reverend  Bishop  Andrews  his  chapel, 
with  the  furniture,  plate,  ceremonies  therein  used,  and  all 
things  else.  And  this  copy  was  sent  me  by  the  household 
chaplain  to  that  famous  bishop  d.  "  This  I  laid  open  to  the 
Lords,  and  it  would  have  made  any  man  ashamed  but 
Mr.  Pryn,  who  had  delivered  upon  oath  that  it  was  a  paper 
of  my  chapel  furniture  at  Aberguilly,  contrary  to  his  con 
science,  and  his  own  eyesight  of  the  paper."  And  for  wafers, 
I  never  either  gave  or  received  the  Communion,  but  in  ordi 
nary  bread.  At  Westminster  I  knew  it  was  sometimes  used, 
but  as  a  thing  indifferent.  As  for  the  slur  here  given  to  that 
reverend  dead  Bp.  of  Winchester,  it  might  well  have  been 
spared;  he  deserved  far  better  usage  for  his  service  to  the 
Church  of  England  and  the  Protestant  cause. 

The  fourth  charge  was  the  publishing  the  Book  of  Recrea-  IV. 
tions e :  and  it  was  ushered  in  with  this  scorn  upon  me, '  that 
I  laboured  to  put  a  badge  of  holiness,  by  my  breath,  upon 
places,  and  to  take  it  away  from  days/     But  I  did  neither : 
the  King  commanded  the  printing  of  it,  as  is  therein  attested ; 
343  and  the  warrant  which  the  King  gave  me,  they  have l  f :  and 
1  ['  and  the  warrant .  .  .  they  have  :'  in  margin.] 

c  [See  Diary,  Aug.  29, 1611,  vol.  iii.  "  Charles  E. 

p.  135.]  "  Canterbury,  see  that  our  Declara- 

d  [This  very  copy  is  now  preserved  tion  concerning  liecreations  on  the 

among  the  Harl.  MSS.  in  Brit.  Mus.]  Lord's-day  after  Evening  Prayer,  be 

e  [See  the  King's  Declaration  in  printed." 

Rushworth's  Collections,  vol.  ii.   pp.  Prynne  accuses  the  Archbishop  of 

193—196.]  obtaining  this  warrant  without  date, 

f  [It  is  thus  given  by  Prynne  (Cant.  "  to  justify  himself,  if  questioned  for 

Doom,  p.  148) : —  it,  upon  any  future  occasion."] 


Die  Deoi-  though  at  consecrations  I  read  the  prayers,  yet  it  was  God's 
tlo<  blessing,  not  my  breath,  that  gave  the  holiness.  And  for 
the  day,  I  ever  laboured  it  might  be  kept  holy,  but  yet  free 
from  a  superstitious  holiness.  And  first,  it  was  said,  '  that 
this  was  done  of  purpose  to  take  away  preaching.'  But  first, 
there  is  no  proof  offered  for  this.  And  secondly,  'tis  impos 
sible;  for  till  the  afternoon  service  and  sermon  were  done, 
no  recreation  is  allowed  by  that  book,  nor  then  to  any  but 
such  as  have  been  at  both.  Therefore  it  could  not  be  done 
to  take  it  away.  Thirdly,  the  book  names  none  but  lawful 
recreations  :  therefore,  if  any  unlawful  be  used,  the  book 
gives  them  no  warrant.  And  that  some  are  lawful,  (after  the 
public  service  of  God  is  ended,)  appears  by  the  practice  of 
Geneva,  where,  after  evening  prayer,  the  elder  men  bowl, 
and  the  younger  train.  And  Calvin  says  in  express  terms, 
that  one  cause  of  the  institution  of  the  Sabbath  was,  *  that 
servants  might  have  a  day  of  rest  and  remission  from  their 
labour  %  :'  and  what  time  of  the  day  fit,  if  not  after  evening 
prayer?  and  what  rest  is  there  for  able  young  men,  if  they 
may  use  no  recreation  ?  Then  it  was  urged,  '  that  there  was 
great  riot  and  disorder  at  wakes  kept  on  the  Ld/s-day/ 
That  is  a  very  sufficient  cause  to  regulate  and  order  those 
feasts,  but  not  quite  to  take  them  away.  I  make  no  doubt 
for  my  part  but  that  the  Feast  of  the  Dedication  was  abused 
by  some  among  the  Jews ;  and  yet  Christ  was  so  far  from 
taking  it  away  for  that,  as  that  he  honoured  it  with  His  own 
presence.  S.  John  x.h  As  for  the  paper  which  was  read, 
'  containing  (184)  three  causes  why  that  book  was  published/ 
that  was  a  note  taken  for  my  own  private  use  and  memory1. 
Then  came  in  Mr.  Pryn,  who  said  that  '  the  Ld.  Chief 

s  "  Tertio  servis,  et  iis  qui  sub  alio-  book  set  out  by  Theophilus  Brabourne, 

rum  degerent  imperio,  quietis  diem  1628,  'Judaism  upon  Christian  Prin- 

indulgendum  censuit,  quo  aliquam  ha-  ciples,'   and   perverted   many.     3.  A 

berent  a  labore  remissionem."— Cal.  great  distemper  in  Somersetshire,  upon 

lib.  ii.  Inst.  c.  8.  §28.   [Op.  torn.  ix.  the  forbidding  of  the  wakes,  in  the  sour- 

p.  99.]  ness  of  this  opinion;   an  Act  of  the 

h  S.  John  x.  22.  judge  that  rid  that  circuit,  March  15, 

1    [Prynne    thus    gives    it    (Cant.  1627,  and  followed  by  another,  1630; 

Doom,  p.  148) : — "  The   Declaration  and  his  Majesty  troubled  with  peti- 

concerning  lawful  sports  on  the  Lord's-  tions  and  motions  by  some  chief  men 

day,  his  Majesty  commanded  me  to  of  that  county,  on  both  sides.     4.  His 

see    it   printed.     The   motives   to   it  royal  father's  example  upon  the  like 

were  :  1.  A  general  and  superstitious  occasions  in  Lancashire."] 
opinion  conceived  of  that  day.     2.  A 


Justice  Richardson  had  made  an  order  in  his  circuit  against  Die  Deci- 
these  wakes,  and  was  forced  to  revoke  it  k.'  This  was  done  by  " 
authority,  as  is  before  answered ;  to  which  I  refer  myself1. 
Here  'tis  added,  to   help  fill  up  the  noise :    but  Mr.  Pryn 
says,  f  that  all  the  gentlemen  in  the  country  petitioned  in 
the  judge's  behalf/     No  :  there  was  a  great  faction  in  Somer 
setshire  at  that  time,  and   Sir  Robert  Philips   and  all  his 
party  writ  up  against  the  judge  and  the  order  he  made,  as 
was  apparent  by  the  certificates  which  he  returned.     And 
Sir  Robert  was  well  known  in  his  time  to  be  neither  Popish 
nor  profane.     He  says  further,  '  that  William,  then  Earl  of 
Pembroke,  was   out  of  town,  and  the  book  printed  in  the 
interim  by  my  procurement/     But  for  this  last,  here's  not 
one  word  of  proof  offered,  and  so  I  leave  it. 

The  fifth  charge  was,  that  some  ministers  were  punished  V. 
for  not  reading  this  book.    Witnesses  for  this  were  produced. 

1.  The  first  was  Sir  Nath.  Brent;  who  says,  '  he  had  charge 
from  me  to  call  for  an  account  of  not  reading  this  book,  both 
in  my  province  at  my  visitation,  and  in  my  diocese/  His 
Majesty  having  commanded  this,  I  could  do  little  if  I  had 
not  so  much  as  inquired  what  was  done :  and  he  confesses, 
'  that  for  my  province  he  gave  time  to  them  which  had  not 
read  it,  and  then  never  asked  more  after  it/  So  here  was 
no  eager  prosecution.  But  then  he  says,  ( that  three  in  my 
diocese  stood  out,  and  asked  timem/  And  confesses  that  I 
344  granted  it:  but  adds,  'that  when  he  asked  more  time  for 
them,  I  denied  ;  and  that  they  were  then  suspended  ab  qfficio 
only/  I  thought  I  had  reason  to  deny,  when  I  saw  they  did 
but  dally  by  asking  time.  And  it  was  then  evident  that  in 
the  diocese  of  other  bishops  far  more  than  three  were 
punished,  and  their  punishment  greater.  "However,  this 
my  proceeding  was  far  from  rigour.  And  this  was  the  answer 
that  I  gave  Mr.  Brown,  who  in  the  sum  of  his  charge 
instanced  in  this  particular  against  me1/7 

1  ['  However,  this  .  .  .  against  me.'  on  opposite  page.] 

k  [See  Sir  Thomas  Richardson's  m  [The  three  persons  referred  to 

order,  in  Prynne,  Cant.  Doom,  pp.  were  Richard  Culmer,  John  Player,  of 

131,  132.]  Kennington,  and  Thomas  Hieron,  of 

1  [See  above,  p.  133.]  Hernhill.] 


Die  Deci  2.  The  second  witness  was  Mr.  Culmer  u,  one  of  the  three 
t10'  ministers  that  was  suspended.  He  says,  'that  he  was  sus 
pended  by  Sir  Nath.  Brent,  and  that  when  he  came  to  me 
about  it,  I  said,  If  you  know  not  how  to  obey,  I  know  not 
how  to  grant  your  petition/  Truly,  my  Lds.,  finding  him 
both  wilful  and  ignorant,  I  cannot  tell  what  I  could  say  less. 
He  says,  '  that  his  patron  took  away  his  benefice.'  Why,  my 
Lds.,  he  had  none ;  he  was  only  a  curate,  and,  God  knows, 
unfit  for  that.  So  being  suspended  from  his  office,  this  must 
needs  be  done.  He  says,  '  he  was  not  absolved  till  the  Scots 
came  in,  and  that  he  was  conformable  in  all  things  else/ 
For  the  time  of  his  absolution,  I  leave  that  to  the  record : 
but  for  his  conformity  in  other  things,  'tis  more  than  ever 
I  heard  any.  "  This  I  can  say  for  him,  he  is  good  at  pur 
chasing  a  benefice  :  for  he  offered  a  servant  of  mine  one 
hundred  and  fifty  pounds,  so  he  could  procure  me  but  to 
name  him  to  the  Parliament  for  Chartham  in  Kent.  Since, 
I  have  heard  he  is  as  good  at  doing  reverence  in  the  church  °: 
for  he  pissed  in  the  body  of  the  cathedral  at  Canterbury  at 
noonday,  as  will  be  justified  by  oath  P.  And  for  this  very 
particular,  the  Book  of  Recreations,  he  informed  at  the 
Council-table  against  a  gentleman  of  quality,  for  saying  it 
was  unfit  such  books  should  be  sent  for  ministers  to  read  in 
the  church^.  And  was  himself  laid  by  the  heels  for  the  false 
hood  of  this  information.  So  he  is  very  good  at  the  point  of 
conscience  too,  that  can  refuse  to  read  the  book,  as  being  unfit, 
and  complain  to  have  another  punished  for  saying  ;tis  so." 

3.  The  third  witness  is  Mr.  Wilson r.  He  says,  '  that  I 
sent  to  Sir  Nath.  Brent  to  suspend  him/  That  is  true,  but 
it  was  when  he  would  neither  obey,  nor  keep  in  his  tongue. 
He  says,  '  his  living  was  sequestered  for  almost  four  years/ 
But  it  was  not  for  not  reading  this  book.  For  himself 

n  [See  above,  p.  17.]  upon  the  whole,  think  him  to  have 

0  This  Mr.  Culmer  not  only  pissed  been  one  of  the  greatest  villains  in 

in  the  church  of  Canterbury,  but  also  the  three  kingdoms. — H.  W. 

demolished  the  noble  glass  windows  P  Antidotum  Culmerianum,  p.  11. 

of  it  with  his  own  hands.     The  like  he  1  Ibid.  p.  35.  [These  passages  from 

did  in  the  parish-church  of  Minster,  Antidot.  Culmer.,  are  given  by  Whar- 

in  Thanet ;  which  benefice  he  usurped  ton  in  the  Appendix.] 

during  the  Kebellion.      I   have  had  r  [Thomas   Wilson,  of  Otham,   at 

more  particular  opportunities  to  be  this  time  one   of   the    Assembly   of 

informed  concerning  him  from  many  Divines.] 
yet  alive,  who  knew  him  well;  and 


confesses  it  was  done  in  the   High- Commission;    and  that  Die  Deoi- 
for  dilapidations,  in  not  repairing  his  house. 

4.  The  fourth  witness  was  one  Mr.  Snelling s,  a  minister  in 
the  diocese  of  Rochester.  All  that  was  done  against  this 
man  was  openly  in  the  High-Commission  Court.  And  there 
he  was  censured  for  other  things,  as  well  as  for  this.  Himself 
confesses  his  open  refusing  to  bow  at  the  name  (185)  of  Jesus, 
though  the  Canon  of  the  Church  command  it.  I  kept  him 
off  from  being  sentenced  a  long  time,  and  when  he  was 
sentenced  he  confesses  I  was  not  present.  He  says,  '  some 
what  was  expunged  out  of  his  brief/  If  it  were,  it  was  with 
the  consent  of  his  counsel ;  which  in  that  court  was  ordinary. 
345  Howsoever,  it  cannot  touch  me  :  for  those  things  were  done 
at  informations,  where  I  was  not  present.  He  says,  that 
when  I  heard  of  the  nature  of  his  defence,  I  said,  '  If  any 
such  defence  were  put  in,  it  should  be  burnt.'  This  was 
upon  just  complaint  of  the  judge  then  present  at  informa 
tions,  affirming  it  was  against  all  the  course  of  that  court. 
He  says,  '  there  is  no  penalty  mentioned  in  that  Declaration.' 
And  I  say,  his  obedience  and  other  men's  should  have  been 
the  more  free  and  cheerful.  Well,  I  pray  God  keep  us  in 
the  mean,  in  this  business  of  the  Sabbath,  as  well  as  in  other 
things,  that  we  run  not  into  a  Jewish  superstition,  while  we 
seek  to  shun  profaneness.  This  Calvin  hath  in  the  meantime 
assured  me,  '  that  those  men  who  stand  so  strictly  upon  the 
morality  of  the  Sabbath,  do  by  a  gross  and  carnal  Sabbatiza- 
tion,  three  times  outgo  the  superstition  of  the  Jew  V 

Here  it  was  inferred,  '  that  there  was  a  combination  for 
the  doing  of  this  in  other  dioceses/  But  no  proof  at  all  was 
offered.  Then  Bp.  Montague's  Articles,  and  Bp.  Wrenn's 
were  read,  to  show  that  inquiry  was  made  about  the  reading 
of  this  booku.  And  the  Bp.  of  London's  Articles  named,  but 
not  read.  But  if  I  were  in  this  combination,  why  were  not 
my  Articles  read  ?  Because  no  such  thing  appears  in  them ; 

8   [Lawrence    Snelling,   Rector    of  Cal.  ii.  Inst.  c.  8,  §  34.  [Op.,  torn.  ix. 

Paul's  Cray,  Kent.     His  case  is  stated  p.  100.] 

in  full  by  Prynne  (Cant.  Doom,  pp.          u  [See  the  passages  from  Bp.  Mon- 

151,  152).]  tagu's  and  Bp.  Wren's  Visitation  Ar- 

* ' "  Crassa  carnalique  Sabbatismi  tides,  in  Prynne,  Cant.  Doom,  p.  153.] 
superstitione  ter  Judeeos  superant."- 


Die  Deci-  and  because  my  Articles  gave  so  good  content,  that  while  the 
t10'  Convocation  was  sitting,  Dr.  Brownrigg  x  and  Dr.  Oldsworth  y 
came  to  me,  and  desired  me  to  have  my  book  confirmed  in 
Convocation,  to  be  general  for  all  bishops  in  future,  it  was  so 
moderate  and  according  to  law.  (  But  why  then,'  say  they, 
'  were  other  Articles  thought  on,  and  a  clause  that  none 
should  pass  without  the  approbation  of  the  Archbp.2  ?'  Why, 
other  were  thought  on,  because  I  could  not  in  modesty  press 
the  confirmation  of  my  own,  though  solicited  to  it.  And  that 
clause  was  added,  till  a  standing  book  for  all  dioceses  might 
be  perfected,  that  no  qu&re  in  the  interim  might  be  put  to 
any,  but  such  as  were  according  to  law. 

VI.  The  sixth  charge  was  about  '  reversing  of  a  decree  in 
Chancery/  (as  'tis  said,)  ' about  houses  in  Dr.  Walton's a  parish, 
given/  as  was  said,  '  to  superstitious  uses/ 

1.  The  first  witness  was  Sergeant  Turner.     He  says,  fhe 
had  a  rule  in  the  King's  Bench  for   a  prohibition  in  this 
cause/     But  by  reason  of  some  defect  (what,  is  not  men 
tioned,)  he  confesses  he  could  not  get  his  prohibition.    Here's 
nothing  that  reflects  upon  me.     And  if  a  prohibition  were 
moved  for,  that  could  not  be  personally  to  me,  but  to  my 
judge   in  some   spiritual  court,   where  it  seems   this   cause 
depended,  and  to  which  the  decree  in  Chancery  was  directed. 
And  indeed  this  act,  which  they  call  a  '  reversing/  was  the 
act  and  seal  of  Sir  Nath.  Brent  my  vicar-general.     And  if 
he  violated  the  Ld.  Keeper's  decree,  he  must  answer  it.     But 
the  instrument  being  then  produced,  it  appeared  concurrent 
in  all  things  with  the  decree.     The  words  are,  Junta  scopum 
decreti  hac  in  parte  in  curia  Cancellaria  factum,  &c. 

2.  The  second  witness  was  Mr.  Edwards.     And  wherein 
he  concurs  with  Sergeant  Turner,  I  give  him  the  same  answer. 

x  [Prebendary  of  Ely,    Master  of  Wight.     An  account  of  his  life  is  pre- 

Catherine  Hall,  and   Archdeacon  of  fixed  to  his  "  Pnelectiones  Theologi- 

Coventry.     He  was  made,   in  1641,  cee,"  edited  by  his  nephew,  Richard 

Bp.  of  Exeter.     See  his  Life  in  full  Pearson.   (Wood,  F.  0.  i.  375,  376.)] 
in  Lloyd's  Worthies]  z  [See  Canons  of  1640.    Canon  ix. 

y  [Richard  Holdsworth,  Master  of  Works,  vol.  v.  p.  627.] 
Emmanuel  College,  and  Rector  of  St.          a  [Dr.  Brian  Walton,  Rector  of  S. 

Peter-le-Poor  in  London.     In  1645  he  Martin's    Orgar    in    Cannon   Street, 

was   nominated    to    the    deanery  of  the  celebrated  Editor  of  the  London 

Worcester.     He  attended  the  King  at  Polyglott   Bible  :    afterwards  Bishop 

Hampton   Court  and  in  the  Isle  of  of  Chester.] 


316  For  that  which  he  adds,  that  Dr.  Walton  '  did  let  leases  of  DieDeci- 
these   houses   at   an   undervalue,    and   called   none   of  the m 
parishioners  to  it :'   if  he  did  in  this  anything  contrary  to 
justice,  or  the  will  of  the  donor,  or  the  decree,  he  is  living  to 
answer  for  himself ;  me  it  concerns  not.     For  '  his  exception 
taken  to  my  grant'  (of  confirmation  I  think  he  means),  '  and 
to    the   words   therein,    omnis  et   omnimoda,    &c. ;'    'tis  the 
ancient   style   of  such   grants,   for  I  know  not  how   many 
hundred  years;  no  syllable  innovated  or  altered  by  me. 

Then  followed  the  charge  of  Mr.  Burton  and  Mr.  Pryn,  VII. 
about  their  answer,  and  their  not  being  suffered  to  put  it 
into  the  Star-Chamber.  Which  though  Mr.  Pryn  pressed  at 
large  before  b,  yet  here  (186)  it  must  come  again,  to  help  fill 
the  world  with  clamour.  Yet  to  that  which  shall  but  seem 
new  I  shall  answer.  Two  things  are  said.  (1.)  The  one, '  that 
they  were  not  suffered  to  put  in  their  defence,  modo  et  forma, 
as  it  was  laid/  There  was  an  order  made  openly  in  court  to 
the  judges,  to  expunge  scandalous  matter.  And  the  two 
Chief  Justices  did  order  the  expunging  of  all  that  which  was 
expunged,  be  it  more  or  less :  as  appears  in  the  Acts  of  that 
court.  (2.)  The  other  is,  'that  I  procured  this  expunging.' 
The  proofs  that  I  procured  it  were  these  :  1.  First,  '  because 
Mr.  Cockshot  gave  me  an  account  of  the  business  from 
Mr.  Attorney.'  I  had  reason  to  look  after  the  business,  the 
whole  Church  of  England  being  scandalized  in  that  bill,  as 
well  as  myself.  But  this  is  no  proof  that  I  either  gave  direc 
tion  or  used  any  solicitation  to  the  reverend  judges,  to  whom 
it  was  referred.  2,  Secondly,  '  because  I  gave  the  Lords 
thanks  for  it :'  it  was  openly  in  court :  it  was  after  the  ex 
punging  was  agreed  unto.  And  what  could  I  do  less  in  such 
a  cause  of  the  Church,  though  I  had  not  been  personally 
concerned  in  it  ?  3.  Thirdly,  '  because  I  had  a  copy  of  their 
answer  found  in  my  study.'  I  conceive  it  was  not  only  fit, 
but  necessary  for  me  to  have  one,  the  nature  of  the  cause 
considered.  But  who  interlined  any  passages  in  it  with  black- 
lead,  I  know  not.  For  I  ever  used  ink,  and  no  black-lead  all 
my  life.  These  be  strange  proofs  that  I  procured  anything. 

Then  Mr.  Pryn  added,  '  that  the  justice  and  favour  which 
was  afforded  Dr.  Leighton  was  denied  unto  him.'    As  far  as  I 
b  [See  above,  p.  109.] 

LAUT>. — TOL.  IV.  S 


Die  Deci-  remember,  it  was  for  the  putting  in  of  his  answer  under  his 
own  hand.  This,  if  so,  was  done  by  order  of  the  court ;  it  was 
not  my  act. 

VIII.  The  last  charge  followed.  And  that  was  taken  out  of  the 
preface  to  my  speech  in  Star-Chamber.  The  words  are, 
'  That  one  way  of  government  is  not  always  either  fit  or  safe, 
when  the  humours  of  the  people  are  in  a  continual  change  c/ 
&c.  From  whence  they  inferred,  I  laboured  to  reduce  all  to 
an  arbitrary  government.  But  I  do  humbly  conceive,  no 
construction  can  force  these  words  against  me  for  an  arbitrary 
government.  For  the  meaning  is,  and  can  be  no  other,  for 
sometimes  a  stricter,  and  sometimes  a  remisser  holding  and 
ordering  the  reins  of  government ;  yet  both  according  to  the 
same  laws,  by  a  different  use  and  application  of  mercy  and 
justice  to  offenders.  "  And  so  I  answered  to  Mr.  Brown, 
who  charged  this  against  me  as  one  of  my  ill  counsels  to  his 
Majesty.  But  my  answer  given  is  truth.  For  it  is  not  said,  347 
that  there  should  not  be  one  law  for  government,  but  not  one 
way  in  the  ordering  and  execution  of  that  law.  And  the 
'  Observator '  upon  my  speech  (an  English  author,  and  well 
enough  known,  though  he  pretend  'tis  a  translation  out  of 
Dutch),  though  he  spares  nothing  that  may  be  but  carped  at, 
yet  to  this  passage  he  says,  '  'tis  a  good  maxim,  and  wishes 
the  King  would  follow  it  V  And  truly,  for  my  part,  I  learned 
it  of  a  very  wise  and  able  governor,  and  he  a  King  of  England 
too,  it  was  of  Hen.  VII.,  of  whom  the  story  says,  that  in  the 
difficulties  of  his  time  and  cause,  he  used  both  ways  of 
government,  severity  and  clemency,  yet  both  these  were  still 
within  the  compass  of  the  law e.  He  far  too  wise,  and  I 
never  yet  such  a  fool,  as  to  embrace  arbitrary  government." 

c  My  Speech  in  the  Star-Chamber,  upon  my  Speech,  p.  78. 
Prsefat.  versus  finem.     [The  pages  are          e  Speed  in  Hen.  VII.  §  16.  [p.  731. 

not  marked.]  Lond.  1614.] 

d  Divine  and  Politic  Observations 



THIS  day  I  received  a  note  from  the  Committee,  that  they  Junii  14, 
intended  to  proceed  next  upon  the  remainder  of  the  seventh, 
and  upon  the  eighth  and  ninth  original   articles.     Which 
follow  in  h<ec  verba. 

The  eighth  Article  :— 

8.  That  for  the  better  advancing  of  his  traitorous  purpose 
and  design,  he  did  abuse  the  great  power  and  trust  his 
Majesty  reposed  in  him ;  and  did  intrude  upon  the  places 
of  divers  great  officers,  and  upon  the  right  of  other  his 
Majesty's  subjects ;  whereby  he  did  procure  to  himself  the 
nomination  of  sundry  persons  to  ecclesiastical  dignities, 
promotions  and  benefices  belonging  to  his  Majesty  and 
divers  of  the  nobility,  clergy  and  others ;  and  hath  taken 
upon  him  the  commendation   of  chaplains  (187)   to  the 
King ;  by  which  means,  he  hath  preferred  to  his  Majesty's 
service,  and  to  other  great  promotions  in  the  Church,  such 
as  have  been  Popishly  affected,  or  otherwise  unsound  and 
corrupt  both  in  doctrine  and  manners. 

The  ninth  Article  :— 

9.  He  hath  for  the  same  traitorous  and 1   wicked  intent, 
chosen  and  employed  such  men  to  be  his  Chaplains,  whom 
he  knew  to  be   notoriously  disaffected  to  the  Reformed 
religion,  grossly    addicted  to    Popish   superstition,    and 
erroneous  2  and  unsound  both  in  judgment  and  practice ; 
and  to   them,  or  some  of  them,  he  hath  committed  the 
licensing  of  books  to  be  printed,  by  which  means  divers 
false  and  superstitious  books  have  been  published,  to  the 
great  scandal  of  religion,  and  to  the  seducing  of  many  of 
his  Majesty's  subjects. 

1  ['  traitorous  and '  in  marg.] 

2  ['erroneous'  in  margin;  originally  'ceremonies,'] 

S  2 



Junii  17,         AT  the  ending  of  the  former  day's  charge,  I  was  put  off 

54 4j         to  this  day,  which  held.     The  first  charge  was   '  concerning 

Monday.     Mr.  Damport's  leaving  his  benefice  in  London,  and  going 

DieDec'i-    into  Holland  V 

1.  The  first  witness  for  this  was  Quatermari,  a  hitter  enemy 

of  mine ;  God  forgive  him.  He  speaks,  '  as  if  he  had  fled 
from  his  ministry  here  for  fear  of  me/  But  the  second 
witness,  Mr.  Dukeswell,  says,  that  he  went  away  upon  a 
warrant  that  came  to  summon  him  into  the  High- Commission. 
The  truth  is,  my  Lords,  and  'tis  well  known,  and  to  some  of 
his  best  friends,  that  I  preserved  him  once  before b,  and  my 
Lord  Veer  c  came  and  gave  me  thanks  for  it.  If  after  this  he 
fell  into  danger  again,  majus  peccatum  habet ;  I  cannot  pre 
serve  men  that  will  continue  in  dangerous  courses.  He  says 
further  (and  in  this  the  other  witness  agrees  with  him),  l  that 
when  I  heard  he  was  gone  into  New-England,  I  should  say 
my  arm  should  reach  him  there/  The  words  I  remember 
not.  But  for  the  thing,  I  cannot  think  it  fit  that  any  plan 
tation  should  secure  any  offender  against  the  Church  of 
England.  And  therefore  if  I  did  say  my  arm  should  reach 
him,  or  them,  so  offending,  I  know  no  crime  in  it ;  so  long  as 
my  arm  reached  no  man  but  by  the  law. 

2.  The  second  witness,   Mr.  Dukeswell,  adds  nothing  to 
this,  but  that  he  says,  Sir  Maurice  Abbot  kept  him  in  before. 
For  which  testimony  I  thank  him.     For  by  this  it  appears, 
that  Mr.  Damport  was  a  dangerous  factious  man,  and  so 
accounted  in  my  predecessor's  time,  and  it  seems  prosecuted 
then  too ;  that  his  brother,  Sir  Maurice  Abbot,  was  then  fain 
(being  then  a  parishioner  of  his)    to  labour  hard  to  keep 
him  in. 

The  second  charge  was  concerning  Nathaniel  Wickens, 
a  servant  of  Mr.  Pryn's. 

*  [John  Davenport, Vicar  of  St.  Ste-  referred  to.] 

phen's,  Coleman  Street.    See  Accounts  c  [Sir  Horatio  Vere,  the  celebrated 

of  Province  for  the  Year  1633.  Works,  commander  of  the  English  troops  in 

vol.  v.  p.  318.]  the   Low   Countries,    created    Baron 

b   [This    agrees    with    the    Arch-  Vere  of  Tilbury,  July  25,  1625,  died 

bishop's  statement  in  the  passage  just  1635.] 

Or   AllCHBISHOP  LAUD.  261 

1 .  The  first  witness  in  this  cause  was  William  Wickeiis,  Die  Deci- 
father  to  Nathaniel.     He  says,  '  his  son  was  nine  weeks  in  m°-<iuarto- 
divers  prisons,  and  for  no  cause  but  for  that  he  was  Mr. 
Pryn's  servant/     But  it  appears  apud  Acta,  that  there  were 

many  articles  of  great  misdemeanour  against  him.  And  after 
wards  himself  adds,  '  that  he  knew  no  cause  but  his  refusing 
to  take  the  oath  ex  officw*  Why,  but  if  he  knew  that,  then 
he  knew  another  cause,  beside  his  being  Mr.  Pryn's  servant. 
Unless  he  will  say  all  Mr.  Pryn's  servants  refuse  that  oath, 
and  all  that  refuse  that  oath  are  Mr.  Pryn's  servants.  As  for 
the  sentence  which  was  laid  upon  him  and  the  imprisonment, 
that  was  the  act  of  the  High-Commission,  not  mine.  Then 
he  says,  '  that  my  hand  was  first  in  the  warrant  for  his  com 
mitment/  And  so  it  was  to  be,  of  course. 

2.  The  second  witness  was  Sarah  Waymaii.     She   says, 
1  that  he  refused  to  take  the  oath/     Therefore  he  was  not 
committed  for  being  Mr.  Pryn's  servant.     She  says,  f  that 
for  refusing  the  oath,  he  was  threatened  he  should  be  taken 
pro  confesso  :   and  that  when  one  of  the  doctors  replied,  that 

349  could  not  be  done  by  the  order  of  the  court,  I  should  say, 
I  would  have  an  order  by  the  next  court-day/  'Tis  manifest 
in  the  course  of  that  court,  that  any  man  may  be  taken  pro 
confesso,  that  will  not  take  the  oath,  and  answer.  Yet  seeing 
how  that  party  of  men  prevailed,  and  that  (188)  one  doctor's 
doubting  might  breed  more  difference,  to  the  great  scandal 
and  weakening  of  that  court,  I  publicly  acquainted  his  Majesty 
and  the  Lords  with  it.  Who  were  all  of  opinion,  that  if  such 
refusers  might  not  be  taken  pro  confesso,  the  whole  power  of  the 
court  was  shaken.  And  hereupon  his  Majesty  sent  his  letter 
under  his  signet,  to  command  us  to  uphold  the  power  of  the 
court,  and  to  proceed.  She  says  further,  fthat  he  desired 
the  sight  of  his  Articles,  which  was  denied  him/  It  was  the 
constant  and  known  course  of  that  court,  that  he  might  not 
see  the  Articles  till  he  had  taken  the  oath,  which  he  refused 
to  do. 

3.  The  third  witness  was  one  Flower.     He  agrees  about 
the  business  of  taking  him  pro  confesso.    But  that's  answered. 
He  adds,  '  that  there  was  nothing  laid  to  his  charge,'  and  yet 
confesses  that  Wickens  desired  to  see  the  articles  that  were 
against  him.     This  is   a  pretty  oath.     There  were  articles 


Die  Deci-   against   him   which  he  desired  to   see,   and   yet  there  was 

4.  Then  was  produced  his  Majesty's  letter  sent  unto  us. 
And  herein  the  King  requires  us  by  his  supreme  power  eccle 
siastical  to  proceed,  &c.     We  had  been  in  a  fine  case,  had  we 
disobeyed  this  command.     Besides,  my  Lords,  I  pray  mark 
it  ;  we  are  enjoined  to  proceed  by  the  King's  supreme  power 
ecclesiastical  ;  and  yet  it  is  here  urged  against  me,  that  this 
was  done  to  bring  in  Popery.     An   excellent  new  way  of 
bringing  in  Popery  by  the  King's  supremacy.    Yea,  but  they 
say,  '  I  should  not  have  procured  this  letter.'    Why  ?    I  hope 
I  may  by  all  lawful  ways  preserve  the  honour  and  just  power 
of  the  court  in  which  I  sat.     And  'tis  expressed  in  the  letter, 
that  no  more   was  done  than  was  agreeable  to  the  laws  and 
customs  of  the  realm.     And  'tis  known  that  both  an  oath, 
and  a  taking  pro  confesso  in  point  of  refusal,  are  used  both  in 
the  Star-Chamber,  and  in  the  Chancery. 

5.  The  last  witness  was  Mr.  Pryn,  who  says,  '  that  his  man 
was  not  suffered  to  come  to  him,  during  his  soreness  when 
his  ears  were  cropped.'     This  favour  should  have  been  asked 
of  the  Court  of  Star-Chamber,  not  of  me.     And  yet  here  is 
no  proof  that  I  denied  him  this,  but  the  bare  report  of  him, 
whom  lie  says  he  employed.     Nor  do  I  remember  any  man's 

.  coming  to  me  about  it. 

III.  The  third  charge  followed  ;  '  it  was  concerning  stopping  of 
books  from  the  press,  both  old  and  new,  and  expunging  some 
things  out  of  them.' 

1.  The  first  instance  was  about  '  the  English  Bibles  with 
the  Geneva  notes.'  The  Bibles  with  those  notes  were  tolerated 
indeed  both  in  Queen  Elizabeth's  and  King  James  his  time  ; 
but  allowed  by  authority  in  neither.  And  King  James  said 
plainly,  'that  he  thought  the  Geneva  translation  was  the 
worst,  and  many  of  the  notes  very  partial,  untrue,  seditious, 
and  savouring  too  much  of  dangerous  and  traitorous  conceits. 
And  gave  instance  d.'  This  passage  I  then  read  to  the.  Lords: 
and  withal  told  them,  that  now  of  late  these  notes  were  more 
commonly  used  to  ill  purposes  than  formerly,  and  that  that 
was  the  cause  why  the  High-Commission  was  more  careful  350 
and  strict  against  them  than  before. 

•'  Confer,  at  Ham.  Court,  p.  47.  [Lond.  1604.] 


Here  Michael  Sparks  the  elder  came  in  as  witness,  and  Die  Deci- 
said,  '  he  was  called  into  the  High-Commission  about  these  m°-(luarto- 
books :'  but  he  confesses,  it  was  not  only  for  them.  He  says, 
'the  restraint  of  those  Bibles  was  for  the  notes/  But  he 
adds,  '  as  he  supposes/  And  his  supposal  is  no  proof.  Be 
sides,  he  might  have  added  here  also,  that  the  restraint  was 
not  for  the  notes  only :  for  by  the  numerous  coming  over  of 
Bibles,  both  with  and  without  notes,  from  Amsterdam,  there 
was  a  great  and  a  just  fear  conceived,  that  by  little  and  little, 
printing  would  quite  be  carried  out  of  the  kingdom.  For  the 
books  which  came  thence,  were  better  print,  better  bound, 
better  paper,  and  for  all  the  charges  of  bringing,  sold  better 
cheap.  And  would  any  man  buy  a  worse  Bible  dearer,  that 
might  have  a  better  more  cheap  ?  And  to  preserve  printing 
here  at  home,  as  well  (189)  as  the  notes,  was  the  cause  of 
stricter  looking  to  those  Bibles.  And  this  appears  by  a  letter 
of  Sir  William  BoswelPs,  his  Majesty's  agent  in  the  Low 
Coun tries e;  the  letter  written  to  me,  and  now  produced  against 
me  :  but  makes  for  me,  as  I  conceive.  For  therein  he  sends 
me  word  of  two  impressions  of  the  Bible  in  English,  one  with 
notes,  and  the  other  without :  and  desires  me  to  take  care  to 
regulate  this  business  at  home.  What  should  I  do  ?  Should 
I  sleep  upon  such  advertisements  as  these,  and  from  such  a 
hand?  Especially  since  he  sends  word  also,  that  Dr.  Amyes 
was  then  printing  of  a  book  wholly  against  the  Church  of 
England f.  So  my  care  was  against  all  underminings,  both  at 
home  and  abroad,  of  the  established  doctrine  and  discipline 
of  the  Church  of  England,  for  which  I  am  now  like  to  suffer. 
And  I  pray  God  that  point  of  Arminianism,  libertas  prophe- 
tandi,  do  not  more  mischief  in  short  time,  than  is  expressible 
by  me. 

2.  The  second  instance  was  about  the  new  decree  of  the 

c  [Extracts  from  Sir  W.  Boswell's  the  book  referred  to  as  being  in  the 

letter  are  given  by  Prynne,  Cant.  press,  was  probably  Ames's  "Fresh 

Doom,  p.  181.]  Suit  against  Human  Ceremonies  in 

f  [William  Ames,  a  distinguished  God's  Worship,  or  a  Triplication  upon 

divine  among  the  Puritans,  had  left  Dr.  Burgess's  Rejoinder  for  Dr.  Mor- 

England  about  1611,  and  became  sue-  ton,"  which  was  published  in  that 

cessively  minister  at  the  Hague,  Pro-  year.  It  was  an  attack  on  Morton's 

fessor  of  Divini'y  at  Franeker,  and  defence  of  the  three  ceremonies,  the 

preacher  to  the  English  congregation  surplice,  the  cross  in  baptism,  and 

at  Rotterdam.  As  Sir  William  Bos-  kneeling  at  the  sacrament.  (Biogr. 

well's  letter  was  dated  Sept.  30,  1633,  Brit.)  ] 


Die  Deei-    Star-Chamber,  concerning  printing  &.     '  Four  articles  of  this 

'  decree  were  read,  namely,  the  1,  2,  18,  24.'    What  these  are, 

may  be  seen  in  the  decree  :  and  as  I  think  that  whole  decree 

made  anno  1637,  useful  and  necessary;  so,  under  your  Lps.' 

favour,  I  think  those  four  articles  as  necessary  as  any. 

Mr.  Waly  and  Mr.  Downes,  two  stationers,  witnesses  in 
this  particular,  say,  'that  they  desired  some  mitigation  of 
the  decree,  and  that  Judge  Bramston  said,  he  could  not  do  it 
without  me.'  I  saw  my  Ld.  Chief  Justice  Bramston  here  in 
the  court  but  the  other  day :  why  was  not  he  examined,  but 
these  men  only,  who  oppose  all  regulating  of  the  press,  that 
opposes  their  profit  ?  And  sure  that  grave  judge  meant,  he 
could  not  do  it  alone  without  the  consent  of  the  court.  Or 
if  he  would  have  me  consulted,  it  was  out  of  his  judicious 
care  for  the  peace  of  this  Church,  almost  pressed  to  death 
by  the  liberty  of  printing  h.  (  The  chief  grievance  they  ex 
pressed  against  the  new  licensing  of  books,  was  only  for 
matter  of  charges/  But  that  is  provided  for  in  the  eighteenth 
article.  And  Mr.  Downes  takes  a  fine  oath,  which  was,  '  that 
he  makes  no  doubt,  but  that  all  was  done  by  my  direction ;' 
and  yet  adds,  that  fhe  cannot  say  it.'  So  he  swears  that, 
which  himself  confesses  he  cannot  say.  And  manifest  it  is 
in  the  preface,  that  this  decree  was  printed  by  '  order  of  the 
court/  and  so  by  their  command  sent  to  the  Stationers'  Hall :  351 
and  the  end  of  it  was  to  suppress  seditious,  schismatical,  and 
mutinous  books,  as  appears  in  the  first  article. 

3.  The  third  instance  was,  'that  I  used  my  power  to 
suppress  books  in  Holland/  This  was  drawn  out  of  a  letter 
which  John  le  Mare,  one  of  the  prime  preachers  in  Amster 
dam,  writ  to  me ;  expressing  therein,  that  '  since  the  procla 
mation  made  by  the  States,  no  man  durst  meddle  with 
printing  any  seditious  libels,  against  either  the  State  or 
Church  of  England/  Where's  the  fault  ?  For  this  gentleman 
did  a  very  good  office  to  this  kingdom  and  Church,  in  pro 
curing  that  proclamation :  for  till  this  was  done,  every  dis 
contented  spirit  could  print  what  he  pleased  at  Amsterdam, 
against  either :  and  if  he  had  any  direction  from  me  about  it 
(which  is  not  proved),  I  neither  am  nor  can  be  sorry  for  it. 

*  [This  decree  is  printed  in  Rush-      pp.  306—315'.] 
worth's  Collections,  vol.  iii.  Append.          h  Frigide  dictum.— W.  S.  A.  C. 


And  the  fear -which  kept  men  in  from  printing,  proceeded  Die  Deci- 
from  the  proclamation  of  the  States,  not  from  any  power  of  mo"(lua 

4.  The  fourth  instance  was  in  c  the  Book  of  Martyrs/  But 
that  was  but  named,  to  credit  a  base  business,  an  almanac 
made  by  one  Mr.  Genebrand  i :  in  which  he  had  left  out  all 
the  saints,  Apostles  and  all ;  and  put  in  those  which  are  named 
in  Mr.  Fox :  and  yet  not  all  them  neither ;  for  he  had  left 
out  the  solemn  days,  which  are  in  Fox,  as  Feb.  2,  Feb.  25, 
Mar.  25.  And  Cranmer  translated  to  Mar.  23. 

In  this  particular,  Mr. Genebrand,  brother  to  this  almanac- 
maker,  witnesseth,  '  that  the  Queen  sent  to  me  about  this 
new  (190)  almanac.  If  her  Majesty  did  send  to  me  about 
it  (as  'tis  probable  she  would  disdain  the  book),  is  that  any 
crime  in  me  ?  Could  I  prevent  her  Majesty's  sending,  who 
could  not  know  so  much  as  that  she  would  send  ?  He  says, 
1  his  brother  was  acquitted  in  the  High-Commission,  but 
charged  by  me  that  he  made  a  faction  in  the  court.'  If  I 
did  say  so,  surely,  my  Lords,  I  saw  some  practising  by  him 
in  this  new-found  way.  He  says,  'the  Papists  bought  up 
a  great  number  of  these  almanacs,  and  burnt  them.'  It 
seems  he  could  not  hinder  that,  nor  I  neither;  unless  it  shall 
not  be  lawful  for  a  Papist  to  buy  an  almanac.  For  when 
he  hath  bought  him,  he  may  burn  him  if  he  please. 

But  since  the  Book  of  Martyrs  was  named,  I  shall  tell 
your  Lps.  how  careful  I  was  of  it.  It  is  well  known  how 
easily  abridgements,  by  their  brevity  and  their  cheapness, 
in  short  time  work  out  the  authors  themselves.  Mr.  Young, 
the  printer,  laboured  me  earnestly  and  often  for  an  'Abridge 
ment  of  the  Book  of  Martyrs.'  But  I  still  withstood  it  (as  my 
secretary  here  present  can  testify),  upon  these  two  grounds : 
the  one,  lest  it  should  bring  the  large  book  itself  into  disuse ; 
and  the  other,  lest  if  any  material  thing  should  be  left  out, 
that  should  have  been  charged  as  done  of  purpose  by  me,  as 
now  I  see  it  is  in  other  books.  And  I  humbly  pray  your 
Lps.,  cast  your  eyes  upon  the  frontispiece  of  the  Book  of 
Martyrs,  printed  an.  1642,  since  this  Parliament  began,  and 

1  His  name  was  Gellibrand. — "VV.  S  .  was  published  in  the  name  of  William 

A.  C.     [Henry  Gellibrand,  of  Trinity  Beale,  servant  to  Gellibrand.    (Wood, 

Coll.  Oxford,  Professor  of  Astronomy  Ath.  Ox.  vol.  ii.  pp.  622,  623.)     Sec 

in  Gresham  College.     The  Almanac  also  Cant.  Doom.  p.  182.] 


Die  Deci-    when  I  was  safe  enough  from  having  any  hand  in  the  business, 
°'  and  there  you  shall  see  as  dangerous  pictures  as  have  been 
charged  upon  me,  or  any  my  chapel  windows. 

Upon  occasion  of  Mr.  Genebrand's  calendar,  Mr.  Pryn  took 
occasion  to  tell  the  Lords,  '  that  I  had  made  notes  upon  the 
Calendar  in  the  Missal/  I  desired  they  might  be  read;  352 
it  was  thought  too  tedious.  They  were  nothing  but  some 
additions  of  my  own  reading  to  the  occurrences  on  some  days. 
And  because  the  Calendar  in  the  Missal  was  open  and  large, 
I  thought  fit  to  write  them  there. 

5.  The  fifth  instance  is  in  Dr.  Pocklinton  his  censure  of 

k,  and  of  Flaccius  Illyricus l.  And  that  '  this  book  was 

licensed  by  my  chaplain  Dr.  Bray.     And  he  was  censured  in 
this  honourable  House  for  that  and  like  slips  of  his  m.  Then  it 
was  inferred  at  the  bar,   '  that  it  must  be  taken  as  my  act,  if 
it  were  done  by  my  chaplain/     But  inferences  are  110  sworn 
proof;    and,   I  conceive,  no  man  can  by  law  be   punished 
criminally  for  his  servant's  fact ;  unless  there  be  proof  that 
he  had  a  hand  in  it.     Then  it  was  urged,  but  without  any 
proof  too,  '  that  Dr.  Pocklinton  was  preferred  by  me  V     To 
which  I  shall  answer  when  proof  is  made  :  and  if  I  had,  'tis 
far  enough  from  treason. 

6.  The  next  instance  was  '  about  the  calling  in  of  Thomas 
Beacon's  Disputation  of  the  Mass  °/     The  witness  Mr.  Pryn. 
1.  He  says, '  the  book  was  licensed,  and  that  a  Papist  thereupon 
said,  Doth  my  Ld.  of  Canterbury  license  such  books  ?     That 
I  was  informed  of  these  words,  and  the  book  called  in  the 
next  day.'     First,  Mr.  Pryn  is  single  in  this  part  of  the  testi 
mony  for  the  words.     Secondly,  if  any  Papist  did  say  so,  it 
was  not  in  my  power  to  stop  his  mouth;  and  they  which 
license  books,  must  endure  many  and  various  censures,  as 

k  I  believe  the  name  here  wanting  that  before  Mr.  Fox  his  Acts  and  Mo- 
is  Mr.  Fox  the  martyrologist. — W.  S.  numents,"  &c. — Pocklington's  Altare 
A.  C.  Christianum,  p.  92.  edit.  1  ;  p.  114. 

1  [The  passage  referred  to  is  the  edit.  2.] 
following  :—  m  [Ou  March  11,  164f     See  Rush- 

"  This  was  the  holy  and  justifiable  worth's  Collections,  vol.  iv.  p.  207.] 
use  of  these  Diptiches,  much  like  the          u  [Pocklington's  preferments  were, 

list  of  persons  censured  by  holy  Church,  the  Kectory  of  Yelden,  the  Vicarage  of 

called  with  some  reproach  of  truth  Waresley,  Prebend  of  Peterborough, 

and    Christian    religion,    '  Catalogus  Oct.  31, 1623,  and  Canonry  of  Windsor, 

Testium  Veritatis,'  collected  into  one  Jan.  5,  16££.     He  was  deprived  of  all 

volume  by  Flaccius  Illyricus,  and  en-  his  preferments,  Feb.  2,  164^.] 
larged  since  by  others,  and  as  unlike          °  [See  the  evidence  on  this  head  in 

a  calendar  that  I  have  seen,  to  wit,  Prynne,  Cant.  Doom,  pp.183,  184.] 


the  readers  of  them  stand  affected.  Thirdly,  if  any  Papist  Die  Deci- 
did  so  speak,  I  have  reason  to  think  it  was  to  do  me  a  m(wluarto- 
mischief,  as  much  as  in  him  lay.  Fourthly,  this  is  a  very 
bold  oath;  for  he  swears,  'that  I  was  informed  of  these 
words.'  He  was  not  present  to  hear  it,  and  then  he  can  have 
it  but  by  hearsay,  and  no  religion  teaches  him  to  swear  that 
for  truth  which  he  doth  but  hear.  Lastly,  the  book  was 
called  in,  because  it  was  slipped  out  contrary  to  the  late 
decree  for  printing.  2.  Yea,  but  Mr.  Pryn  swears,  and  so 
doth  Michael  Sparks  the  other  witness,  '  that  the  book  was 
sent  to  the  printer  before  the  decree/  But  first,  Sparks  his 
oath  is  uncertain ;  for  he  says  Mr.  Pryn  sent  him  the  book 
before  the  decree,  and  then  by  and  by  after,  says,  it  was 
about  that  time.  Now  the  book  is  somewhat  large,  so  that 
it  might  be  sent  him  before  the  decree,  (191)  and  yet  not  be 
printed  till  after,  and  that  a  good  space  too.  And  secondly, 
Mr.  Pryn  himself  confesses,  the  book  was  sent  when  the 
decree  was  in  agitation. 

7.  The  seventh  instance  was  about  Arminianism,  '  as  main 
tained  by  me  against  the  Declarations  of  both  Houses  of 
Parliament  P,  and  of  King  James,  concerning  Vorstius  and 
Bertius  ^.  First,  I  have  nothing  to  do  to  defend  Arminianism, 
no  man  having  yet  charged  me  with  the  abetting  any  point 
of  it.  Secondly,  King  James  his  declaration  is  very  learned : 
but  under  favour,  he  puts  a  great  deal  of  difference  between 
Vorstius  and  Bertius  :  and  his  Majesty' s  opinion  is  clear  with 
the  article  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  so  expressed  by 
himself:  and  to  which  I  ever  consented.  And  the  passage 
in  the  conference  at  Hampton-Court  was  then  read  to  the 
Lords r,  and  yet  for  the  peace  of  Christendom,  and  the 

P  [See    the   Kemonstrance   of   the  brarian  at  Leyden)  was  the  author  of 

House  of  Commons,   June  11,  1628,  a  treatise    on    the    Apostasy   of    the 

(Prynne,  Hidden  Works,  pp.  90—93,)  Saints,    censured    severely    by   King 

and  the  order  made  by  the  House  of  James  (p.  357).  He  joined  the  Church 

Commons,  Jan.  28, 1628  (Cant.  Doom,  of  Rome  in  1620,  and  died  in  1629. 

p.  1G3).     Laud's  answers  to  these  two  In  the  Epist.  Eccle*.  et  Theol.  (Bpist. 

declarations    are    mentioned    below,  ccxxxi.    pp.   386,    387,)   there  is  an 

p.  272.]  interesting    letter    from    Grotius    to 

i  [See    King    James's    Protestatio  John  Wytenbogard,  criticising  freely 

Anti-Vorstiana,  Works,   pp.  351  seq.  some  passages  in  Bertius's  History  of 

Lond.    1619.      King   James    was    so  the  Pelagians,  inserted  in  his  Answer 

strongly  opposed  to  Vorstius  that  he  to   Piscator,   and  predicting  for   the 

threatened   to   break    off    all    inter-  book   an  unfavourable  reception    in 

course  with  the   States,  unless  they  England.! 

banished  him,  which  was  accordingly          r  Confer,  at  Ham.  Court,  pp.  29,  30. 
done.     Bertius  (a  Professor  and  Li- 


Die  Deci-    strengthening  of  the  reformed  religion,  I  do  heartily  wish 
r  °*  these  differences  were  not  pursued  with  such  heat  and  animo 
sity,  in  regard  that  all  the  Lutheran  Protestants  are  of  the 
very  same  opinions,  or  with  very  little  difference  from  those  353 
which  are  now  called  Arminianism. 

And  here  comes  in  Michael  Sparks  ;  who  says,  f  he  was 
called  into  the  High-Commission  about  a  book  of  Bishop 
Carleton's9.  I  cannot  punctually  remember  all  particulars 
so  long  since.  But  he  confesses  the  business  was  in  the 
High-Commission.  And  so  not  singly  chargeable  against 
me.  Besides,  he  is  single  in  this  business.  He  says,  '  he 
was  eleven  years  in  the  High-Commission,  and  never  sen 
tenced.'  "  This  is  more  than  I  know.  But  if  it  be  so,  he 
had  better  luck  than  some  honester  men.  For  a  bitterer 
enemy,  to  his  power,  the  Church-government  never  had." 
He  was  Mr.  Pryii's  printer.  He  says,  '  I  was  a  Dean  then, 
and  he  thinks  of  Hereford.'  I  was  never  Dean  of  Hereford. 
But  howsoever,  this  is  a  dangerous  oath ;  let  him  think  of  it. 
He  swears  that  I  was  a  Dean  then;  and  a  High- Commis 
sioner  ;  or  else  what  had  I  to  do  in  the  business  ?  Now  it 
is  well  known  I  was  never  a  High-Commissioner,  till  I  had 
been  a  Bishop  some  years  *.  For  the  book  itself,  Sparks  says 
nothing  what  was  the  argument  of  it :  but  (so  far  as  I 
remember)  it  was  expressly  against  the  King's  Declaration. 
lf  And  so  I  answered  Mr.  Brown,  when  he  summed  up  the 
evidence  against  me  in  the  House  of  Commons.  And  though 
in  his  reply  he  seemed  to  deny  this,  yet  I  remember  no  proof 
he  brought  for  it." 

8.  The  last  instance  was  pregnant,  and  brought  forth 
many  particulars.  1.  As  first,  '  Dr.  Featly's  Parallels,  against 
Bishop  Mountague  V  But  this  was  still-born ;  at  least  it  says 

s  [George  Carleton,  elected  Bp.  of  on  the  High  Commission.  His  name 
Llandaflf  Dec.  23, 1617,  and  translated  appeared  in  the  Commission  issued 
to  Chichester  Sept.  8,  1619.  He  was  on  the  21st  of  Jan.  following.  (Rymer, 
one  of  the  English  Divines  who  at-  Feed.  VII.  iv.  172.)] 
tended  the  Synod  of  Dort.  The  Book  u  [The  title  of  the  book  is,  Telagius 
referred  to  is, 'An  Examination  of  those  rcdivivus,  or  Pelagius  raked  out  of 
things  wherein  the  Author  of  the  late  the  ashes  by  Arminius  and  his  Scho- 
Appeal  holdeth  the  Doctrine  of  the  lars.  Lond.  1626.'  Wood  (Ath.  Ox. 
Pelagians  and  Arminians  to  be  the  iii.  161)  describes  the  book  as  consist- 
Doctrines  of  the  Church  of  England.  ing  of  two  parallels,  one  between  the 
Lond.  1626.'  Wood  (Ath.  Ox.  ii.  424)  Pelagians  and  Arminians,  the  other 
mentions  a  second  edition  in  1636.]  between  the  Church  of  Rome,  the 

4  [Laud  wrote  to  Buckingham,  Appcaler,  and  the  Church  of  England.] 
Nov.  18,  1624,  requesting  to  be  put 


nothing  of  me.  2.  Secondly,  '  Mr.  Pryn's  Perpetuity  v,  and  Die  Deci- 
against  Dr.  Cosens  x,  both  burnt/  But  he  doth  not  say  abso-  mo'(luarto- 
lutely  burnt,  but  '  as  he  is  informed,'  and  he  may  be  informed 
amiss.  And  howsoever  he  says,  '  it  was  done  by  the  High- 
Commission,  not  by  me/  3.  Thirdly,  '  some  sheets  of  Dr. 
Succliffs  book>r  prohibited  the  Press  at  Oxford.'  I  hope 
Oxford  is  able  to  give  an  account  for  itself.  And  whereas  it 
was  here  said  at  the  bar :  They  hoped  '  I  would  show  some 
repressing  of  the  contrary  part : '  I  would  satisfy  their  hopes 
abundantly,  could  I  bring  witnesses  from  Oxford,  how  even 
and  steady  a  hand  I  carried  to  both  parts z.  4.  Fourthly, 
'  Mr.  Burton  questioned  about  his  book  called  The  Seven 
Vials  a/  But  himself  confesses,  that  upon  Sir  Henr.  Martin's 
information,  that,  as  that  cause  was  laid,  the  High-Commis 
sion  had  no  power  in  it,  he  was  dismissed.  5.  Fifthly,  '  that 
about  his  book,  intituled,  Babel  no  Bethel b,  he  was  questioned 
at  a  court  out  of  term/  This  was  very  usual,  whensoever 
the  court  was  full  of  business,  to  hold  one  court-day  out  of 
term.  This  is  warranted  by  the  Commission.  And  warning 
of  it  was  always  publicly  given  the  court- day  before,  that  all 
whom  it  concerned  might  take  notice  of  it,  and  provide 
themselves.  6.  Sixthly,  he  says,  'he  was  there  railed  at 
by  Bp.  Harsnet/  'Tis  more  than  I  know  that  Bishop 
Harsnet  railed  at  him;  but  if  he  did,  I  hope  I  am  not 
brought  hither  to  answer  all  men's  faults.  7.  Seventhly,  he 
(192)  says,  'he  claimed  the  Petition  of  Right,  yet  was  com 
mitted/  This  is  more  than  I  know  or  believe;  yet  if  it 
were  so,  it  was  done  by  the  High -Commission  Court,  not  by 
me.  8.  He  says  next,  '  that  he  could  never  be  quiet/  But  I 
am  sure,  my  Lords,  the  Church  for  divers  years  could  never 
be  in  quiet,  for  him,  and  his  associates.  9.  Lastly,  they  say, 

v  [The  title  of  the  book  is,  '  The  «    [See    Hist,    of     Chancellorship, 

Perpetuity    of    a    regenerate    Man's  Works,  vol.  v.  pp.  186 — 268.] 

Estate,  against  the  Saints'  total  and  a  [The  title  of  the  book  is,  *  The 

final  Apostasy.    Lond.   1627.'      This  Seven  Vials,  or  an  Exposition  of  the 

appears  to  have    been    the    first  of  15th  and  16th  chapters  of  the  Revela- 

Prynne's  voluminous  publications.]  tions.  Lond.  1628.'] 

*  [The  title  of  the  book  is,  <  A  Brief  b  [The  title  of  the  book  is,  '  Babel 

Survey  and  Censure  of  Mr.  Cozens  his  no  Bethel ;  i.  e.  the  Church  of  Eome 

couzening  Devotions.  Lond.  1628.']  no  true  visible  Church    of   Christ; 

y   [The    writer  was    Dr.   Matthew  being  an  answer  to  Hugh  Cholmely's 

Sutcliffe,  Dean  of  Exeter.     No  book  Challenge,  and  Robert    Butterfield's 

printed  by  Sutcliffe,  at  Oxford,  at  this  Maschil.'] 
date,  appears  in  the  Bodl.  Cat.] 


Die  deci-  '  some  passages  against  Arminianism  were  left  out  of  two  354 
mo-quarto.  letterSj  one  of  Bp  Davenant's,  and  the  other  of  Bp.  Hall's, 
sent  to  be  printed  c.>  First,  here  is  no  proof  at  all  offered, 
that  I  differed  in  anything  from  the  doctrine  expressed  in 
those  letters.  And  secondly,  for  the  leaving  out  of  those 
passages,  it  was  (it  seems)  done  to  avoid  kindling  of  new 
flames  in  the  Church  of  England.  And  it  appeared  on  the 
other  side  of  the  paper,  which  was  produced  against  me,  and 
so  read  to  the  Lords ;  that  these  passages  were  left  out  by 
the  express  order  from  those  Bps.  themselves,  under  Bp. 
Hall's  own  hand,  and  with  thanks  to  Dr.  Turner d,  then  my 
chaplain,  for  his  letter  to  them.  And  here  this  day's  busi 
ness  ended.  And  I  received  command  to  attend  again  the 
twentieth  of  the  same  month. 

c  [The  passages  erased  are  found          d  [Thomas  Turner  (son  of  Thomas 

in  Prynne's  Cant.  Doom,  pp.  165, 166.  Turner,  Alderman,  and  thrice  Mayor  of 

The  letters,  of  which  these  omitted  Beading),  of  S.John's  College,  Oxford, 

passages  originally  formed  a  part,  are  He  was,  at  an  early  age,  taken  under 

in  Bp.  Hall's  Works,  vol.  ix.  pp.319 —  Laud's  patronage ;  appointed  Preb.  of 

321,  Lond.  1808,  at  the  beginning  of  Newington  in  8.  Paul's  Church,  April 

his  '  Reconciler;'    and  with  the  ex-  14,  1629,  and  Chancellor  of  S.  Paul's, 

ception  of   a  small  portion  in   Bp.  Oct.  29  following;  Dean  of  Rochester, 

Hall's  letter  (where  part  of  the  pas-  and  Dean  of  Canterbury  1643.     After 

sage  which  Prynne  says  was  omitted,  is  having  suffered  severely  during  the 

inserted,  and  which  may  arise  from  an  Rebellion,   he    was    restored    to    his 

error  on  his  part),  the  letters  are  still  preferments.     He  married  Margaret, 

printed  as  Abp.  Laud  left  them ;  so  daughter  of  Sir  Francis  Windebank ; 

far  bearing  out  the  statement  in  the  by  whom  he  had,  among  other  sons, 

text.      Language    sufficiently  strong  Francis  Turner,  the  non-juring  Bishop 

against  Rome,  was  permitted  to  re-  of  Ely  (Wood,  F.  0.  i.  472).] 
main  in  Bp.  Davenant's  letter.] 




Tins  day  I  came  again  to  the  House.     A  day  or  two  before.  Junii  20, 

1  R  4  A. 

as  now  also,  the  landing  place  at  Westminster  was  not  so  rrhur'sday< 
full  of  people ;  and  they  which  were  there,  much  more  civil  Die  Deci- 
towards  me  than  formerly.  My  friends  were  willing  to  per 
suade  me,  that  my  answer  had  much  abated  the  edge  of  the 
people,  saving  from  the  violent  and  factious  leaders  of  the 
multitude,  whom  it  seems  nothing  would  satisfy  but  my  life 
(for  so  I  was  after  told  in  plain  terms,  by  a  man  deeply 
interested  in  them) ;  when  I  presently  saw  Quaterman 
coming  towards  me,  who,  so  soon  as  he  came,  fell  to  his 
wonted  railing,  and  asked  aloud,  '  what  the  Lords  meant,  to 
be  troubled  so  long  and  so  often,  with  such  a  base  fellow  as 
I  was  ;  they  should  do  well  to  hang  me  out  of  the  way/  I 
heard  the  words  with  grief  enough,  and  so  left  them  and  him 
in  the  hands  of  God.  My  servants  were  earnest  to  have  me 
complain  to  the  Lords.  I  remembered  my  late  complaint 
about  the  pamphlets  had  no  redress;  and  so  forbare  it. 
They  notwithstanding,  out  of  their  zeal,  complained  to  Mr. 
Lieutenant  of  the  Tower;  who  presently  went  forth,  and 
said  he  would  school  him.  But  I  hearkened  no  more 
after  it. 

When  I  came  to  the  bar,  Mr.  Nicolas  began  with  great 
violence,  and  told  the  Lords,  '  the  business  grew  higher  and 
higher  against  me/  What  the  business  did,  will  after  appear ; 
but  I  am  sure  he  grew  higher  and  higher,  and  from  this  time 
forward,  besides  the  violence  of  expression,  gave  me  such 
language,  as  no  Christian  would  give  a  Jew.  But  God,  I 
humbly  thank  Him,  blessed  me  with  patience ;  and  so  I 
made  my  ears  obedient.  That  which  made  him  say  '  the 
business  grew  higher  and  higher/  was  this.  Upon  my  often 
calling  to  have  the  oaths  at  the  coronation  of  King  James 


Die  Deci-  and  King  Charles  compared,  some  of  them  repaired  again  to 
1  °"  my  study  at  Lambeth,  to  search  for  all  such  copies  of  Coro 
nation-books  as  could  there  be  found11.  In  this  diligent  and  355 
curious  search  ("  for  Mr.  Pryn's  malice  made  it ")  they  found 
some  papers  concerning  Parliaments,  no  other  (I  praise  God 
for  it)  than  such,  as  with  indifferent  construction  might 
(I  hope)  well  pass,  especially  considering  what  occasion  led 
me,  and  what  command  was  upon  me.  And  as  I  have  been 
told  by  able  and  experienced  men,  they  wou'd  have  been 
nothing,  had  they  been  found  in  any,  but  this  troublesome 
and  distracted  time  about  the  rights  of  Parliaments,  (as  'tis 
said).  Howsoever,  I  was  most  unfortunate  they  should  be 
now  found,  and  I  had  not  left  (193)  them  a  being,  but  that 
I  verily  thought  I  had  destroyed  them  long  since.  But 
they  were  unhappily  found  among  the  heaps  of  my  papers. 
And  so 

I.  An  Answer  to  the  Remonstrance b  made  June  17,  1628, 
(which  is  sixteen  years  since,)  was  made  the  first  charge 
against  me. 

II.  And  the  second  charge  was,  '  a  paper  concerning  a  Decla 
ration0,  Jan.  28,  1628.'  To  both  which  I  then  answered; 
but  because  these  are  urged  more  than  once,  to  help  fill  the 
people  with  new  clamour;  and  because  they  are  more  closely 
pressed  against  me  at  the  last  day  of  my  hearing;  and 
because  Mr.  Brown  in  his  summary  charge,  laid  and  charged 
all  these  papers  together ;  to  avoid  tedious  repetition,  I  will 
also  make  my  whole  and  entire  answer  together,  when  that 
time  comes. 

III.  The  third  charge  of  this  day  was,  '  a  letter  of  a  Jesuit  to 
his  superior,  found  in  my  study,  dated  Mar.  1628  <V  Let 
the  letter  be  dated  when  it  will,  I  hope  the  Archbp.  may 
get  and  keep  the  letters  of  any  Jesuits  or  others.  How  shall 
I  be  able  to  know  or  prevent  their  plots  upon  the  religion  by 
law  established,  if  this  may  not  be  done  ?  Yet  this  I  desire 
all  men  to  take  notice  of,  that  this  letter  was  not  directed  to 
me.  I  was  then  Bp.  of  London  :  the  letter  was  found  in  a 
search.  But  when  by  all  possible  care  taken  by  the  High- 

a  [See  above,  p.  212.]  Prynne,  in  Hidden  Works,  pp.  89,  90, 

b  [This  will  be  printed  in  vol.  vi.]  and  in  part  in  Cant.  Doom,  pp.  1 59, 

c  [This  will  be  printed  in  vol.  vi.]  160  ] 
d  [This  letter  is  given  in  full  by 


Commission  the  author  could  not  be  found  l,  I  had  (as  I  Die  Deci- 
humbly  conceive)  great  reason  to  keep  it.  And  I  then  hum-  m°-flumto- 
bly  desired  the  whole  letter  might  be  read.  There  was  in 
it,  that  '  Arminianism '  (as  'twas  urged)  '  was  their  drug,,  and 
their  plot  against  us/  &c.  The  Jesuit  seeing  a  fire  kindling 
about  these  opinions,  might  write  what  he  pleased  to  help  on 
his  cause.  Yet  this  drug,  which  he  says  is  theirs,  is  the 
received  opinion  of  all  the  Lutherans,  and  they  too  learned 
Protestants  to  use  their  drugs.  And  if  it  be  their  drug,  why 
do  the  Dominicans  so  condemn  it  ?  Nay,  why  doth  the 
Master  of  the  Sentences  and  the  School  after  him,  for  the 
most,  determine  rigidly  against  it  ?  And  whereas  'tis  said, 
'  that  these  men  had  instruments  at  the  Duke's  chamber 
door : '  that  belongs  not  to  me,  I  was  not  porter  there.  As 
for  that  power  which  I  had,  (called  by  Mr.  Nicolas  the  com- 
.mand  of  ids  ear,)  I  used  it  as  much  as  I  could  to  shut  such 
instruments  thence.  Beside,  'tis  barely  said,  no  proof  at  all 
offered,  that  such  instruments  were  about  the  Duke's  cham 
ber-door.  Other  papers  were  found  in  my  study,  above  sixty 
at  the  least,  expressing  my  continued  labours  for  some  years 
together,  to  reconcile  '  the  divided  Protestants  in  Germany, 
that  so  they  might  go  with  united  forces  against  the  Romanists. 
"  Why  are  riot  these  produced  too  ?  Would  not  Christianity 
and  justice  have  my  innocence  cleared,  as  well  as  my  faults 
accused  ?" 

356  The  fourth  charge  was  Bp.  Mountague's  preferment.  'The  IV. 
Parliament,'  they  say,  c  called  him  in  question,  and  the  King 
called  in  his  book ;  yet,  in  affront  to  the  Parliament,  that  he 
was  preferred  by  me.'  No :  it  was  then  publicly  known  in 
court  (whether  now  remembered  or  no,  I  cannot  tell)  that 
he  was  preferred  by  my  Lord  Duke  ;  but  being  a  Church 
business,  the  King  commanded  me  to  signify  his  pleasure  to 
the  Signet  office.  And  the  docket  (which,  is  all  the  proof 
here  made)  mentions  him  only  by  whom  the  King's  pleasure 
is  signified,  not  him  that  procures  the  preferment.  So  the 
docket  in  this  case  no  proof  at  all. 

The  fifth  charge  was  a  paper  intituled,  '  Considerations  for   V, 
the  Church c.'    Three  exceptions  against  them.    '  The  obseiva- 

1  ['  But  when  .  .  .  found,'  in  margin.] 

e  [See  Prvnne's  Cant.  Doom,  p.  287.] 

LAUD. — V(>L.  IV.  T 


Die  Deci-    tion  of  the  King's   Declaration,  art.  3 ;  the  Lecturers,  art. 

mo-quinto.  5 .  and  the  High-Commission  and  Prohibitions,  art.  10, 
11.'  The  paper  I  desired  might  be  all  read.  Nothing  in 
them  against  either  law  or  religion.  And  for  Lecturers  a 
better  care  taken,  and  with  more  ease  to  the  people,  and 
more  peace  to  the  Church  *,  by  a  combination  of  conformable 
neighbouring  ministers,  in  their  turns,  and  not  by  some 
one  humorous  man,  who  too  often  misleads  the  people. 
Secondly,  my  copy  of  Considerations f  came  from  Archbp. 
Harsnet,  in  which  was  some  sour  expression  concerning 
Emmanuel  and  Sidney  Colleges  in  Cambridge,  which  the 
King  in  (194)  his  wisdom  thought  fit  to  leave  out.  The  King's 
instructions  upon  these  Considerations,  are  under  Mr.  Baker's 
hand,  who  was  secretary  to  my  predecessor  %.  And  they  were 
sent  to  me  to  make  exceptions  to  them,  if  I  knew  any,  in 
regard  of  the  ministers  of  London,  whereof  I  was  then  Bp. 
And  by  this,  that  they  were  thus  sent  unto  me  by  my  pre 
decessor,  'tis  manifest,  that  this  account  from  the  several 
dioceses  to  the  Archbishop,  and  from  him  to  his  Majesty 
once  a-year,  was  begun  before  my  time.  Howsoever,  if  it 
had  not,  I  should  have  been  glad  of  the  honour  of  it,  had  it 
begun  in  mine.  For  I  humbly  conceive,  there  cannot  be  a 
better  or  a  safer  way  to  preserve  truth  and  peace  in  the 
Church,  than  that  once  a  year  every  bishop  should  give  aii 
account  of  all  greater  occurrences  in  the  Church  to  his 
metropolitan,  and  he  to  the  King.  Without  which,  the 
King,  who  is  the  supreme,  is  like  to  be  a  great  stranger  to 
all  Church  proceedings. 

VI.  The  sixth  charge  was  about  '  Dr.  Sibthorp's  Sermon,  that 
my  predecessor  opposed  the  printing  of  it,  and  that  I  opposed 
him  to  affront  the  Parliament11.'  Nothing  so,  my  Lords. 
Nothing  done  by  me  to  oppose,  or  affront,  the  one  or  the 
other.  This  sermon  came  forth  when  the  loan  was  not  yet 
settled  in  Parliament.  The  Lords,  and  the  Judges,  and  the 
Bishops,  were  some  for,  some  against  it.  And  if  my  judg- 

1  ['  and  more  .  .  .  Church,'  in  margin.] 

f  I  suppose  these  Considerations  h  [See  Abp.  Abbot's  account  of  this 

are  those  published  in  Fryn's  Compl.  business,  in  Kushworth's  Collections, 

Hist.  p.  287.— W.  S.  A.  C.  vol.  i.  pp.  436  seq.] 

*  [See  Laud's  Works,  vol.  v.  p.  307.] 


ment  were  erroneous  in  that  point,  it  was  misled  by  lords  of  Die  Deci- 
great  honour  and  experience,  and  by  judges  of  great  know-  m°-(lumto- 
ledge  in  the  law.  But  I  did  nothing  to  affront  any.  'Tis 
said,  '  that  I  inserted  into  the  sermon,  that  the  people  may 
not  refuse  any  tax  that  is  not  unjustly  laid/  I  conceive 
nothing  is  justly  laid  in  that  kind  but  according  to  law; 
God's  and  man's.  And  I  dare  not  say,  the  people  may  refuse 
anything  so  laid.  For  jus  Regis,  the  right  of  a  King,  (which 
is  urged  against  me  too,)  I  never  went  further  than  the  Scrip- 
357  tures  lead  me ;  nor  did  I  ever  think,  that  jus  Regis,  men 
tioned  1  Sam.  viii.1,  is  meant  of  the  ordinary  and  just  right  of 
kings,  but  of  that  power  which,  such  as  Saul  would  be,  would 
assume  unto  themselves,  and  make  it  right  by  power  l. 

Then  they  say,  I  expunged  some  things  out  of  it  k.  As 
first,  fthe  Sabbath/  and  put  instead  of  it  '  the  Lord's-day/ 
What 's  my  offence  ?  *  Sabbath '  is  the  Jews'  word,  and  the 
f  Lord's-day'  the  Christians'.  Secondly,  '  about  evil  coun 
sellors  to  be  used  as  Haman.'  The  passage  (as  there  ex 
pressed)  was  very  scandalous,  and  without  just  cause,  upon 
the  Lords  of  the  Council.  And  they  might  justly  have 
thought  I  had  wanted  discretion,  should  I  have  left  it  in. 
Thirdly,  that  I  expunged  this,  '  that  Popery  is  against  the 
first  and  the  second  commandment/  If  I  did  it,  it  was 
because  it  is  much  doubted  by  learned  men  whether  any 
thing  in  Popery  is  against  the  first  commandment,  or  denies 
the  unity  of  the  Godhead.  And  Mr.  Perkins  (who  charges 
very  home  against  Popery)  lays  not  the  breach  of  the  first 
commandment  upon  them  *.  te  And  when  I  gave  Mr.  Brown 
this  answer,  in  his  last  reply,  he  asked  '  why  I  left  out 
both?'  Why,  I  did  it  because  its  being  against  the  second 
is  common  and  obvious,  and  I  did  not  think  it  worthy  the 
standing  in  such  a  sermon,  when  it  could  not  be  made  good 
against  the  first." 

But  they  demanded,  '  why  I  should  make  any  animadvert 
sions  at  all  upon  the  sermon?'  It  was  thus.  The  sermon 

1  ['  further  than  ....  power. '  on  the  opposite  page.  The  Archbishop  had 
originally  written  something  different,  which  he  erased.] 

5  1  Sam.  viii.  12.  Doom,  p.  245.] 

k  [The  passages  said  to  have  been          '  Perkins,  Opera,  fol.  p.  34.  [torn,  i, 
expunged  are  given  in  Prynne's  Cant.      Cambr.  1608.] 

T  2 


Die  Deci-  being  presented  to  his  Majesty,  and  the  argument  not  com- 
mo-qmnto.  moj^  ^  committed  the  care  of  printing  it  to  Bishop  Mountain, 
the  Bp.  of  London,   and  four  other;   of  which  I  was  one. 
And  this  was  the  reason  of  the  e  animadversions '  now  called 
mine.  As  also  of  the  answer  '  to  my  predecessor's  exceptions,' 
(now  charged  also)  and  called  mine.     But  it  was  the  joint 
answer  of  the  Committee.     And  so  is  that  other  particular 
also,  '  in  which  the  whole  business  is  left  to  the  learned  in 
the  laws/     For  though  the  '  animadversions '  be  in  my  hand, 
vet  they  were  done  at  and  by  the  Committee,  only  I  being 
puny  Bishop,  was  put  to  write  them  in  my  hand. 
VII.        The  seventh  charge  was  '  Dr.  Manwaring's  business  and 
preferment/     It  was  handled  before  m,  only  resumed  here  to 
make  a  noise,  and  (195)  so  passed  it  over. 

VIII.  The  eighth  charge  was  concerning  '  some  alterations  in  the 
prayers  made  for  the  fifth  of  November11,  and  in  the  book  for 
the  Fast,  which  was  published  an.  1636  °,  and  the  prayers 
on  Coronation- day/ 

1.  First  for  the  Fast-book:    the  prayer   mentioned   was 
altered,  as  is  expressed ;  but  it  was  by  him  that  had  the 
ordering  of  that  book  to  the  press,  not  by  me.     Yet  I  cannot 
but  approve  the  reason  given  for  it,  and  that  without  any  the 
least  approbation  '  of  merit/     For  the  abuse  of  fasting,  by 
thinking  it  meritorious,  is  the  thing  left   out ;  whereas  in 
this  age  and  kingdom,  when,  and  where,  set  fastings  of  the 
Church  are  cried  down,  there  can  be  little  fear  of  that  erro 
neous  opinion  of  placing  any  merit  in  fasting. 

2.  Secondly,  for  the  prayers  published   'for  the  fifth  of 
November,  and  Coronation- day/    The  alterations  were  made 
either  by  the  King  himself,  or  some  about  him,  when  I  was 
not  in  court.     And  the  books   sent  me  with  a  command  for 
the  printing,  as  there   altered.     I   made  stay,  till  I  might 
wait   upon  his   Majesty.     I  found   him  resolved   upon  the  358 
alterations;  nor  in  my  judgment  could  I  justly  except  against 
them.     His  Majesty  then  gave  warrant  to  the  books  them 
selves  with  the  alterations  in  them,  and  so  by  his  warrant 

I  commanded  the  printing.     And  I  then  showed  both  the 
books  to  the  Lords,  who  viewed  them,  and  acknowledged  his 

'  m  [See  above;  p.  83.]  °  [Ibid.  pp.  249,  250.] 

B  [See  Prynne's  Cant.  Doom,  p.  246.] 


Majesty's  hand,  with  which,  not  his  name  only,  but  the  whole  Die  Deci-. 
warrant  was  written  P.  mo-quinto. 

And  here  I  humbly  desired  three  things  might  be  observed, 
and  I  still  desire  it.    First,  with  what  conscience  this  passage 
out  of  my  speech  in  the  Star-Chamber  1  was  urged  against 
me  (for  so  it  was,  and  fiercely  by  Mr.  Nicolas)  to  prove  '  that 
I  had  altered  the  oath  at  the   King's  Coronation/  because 
the  prayers  appointed  for  the  anniversary  of  the  Coronation 
were  altered.    tf  Which  is  absolute  nonsense."    Secondly,  he 
charged  me  '  that  the  word  Antichristian  was  left  out/     But 
that  is  visibly  untrue,  for  it  is  left  in.     Thirdly,  that  though 
it  be  in,  ( yet  that  the  alteration  takes  it  off  from  the  Papist, 
as  also  their  rebellion/     Neither:    for  the  change  is   this, 
'  that  Antichristian  sect/  altered  into  '  the  Antichristian  sect 
of  them  which/  &c.;  and,  '  whose  religion  is  rebellion/  altered 
into,  '  who  turn  religion  into  rebellion/   By  which  it  is  mani 
fest  that  the  alteration  takes  off  neither  imputation  from  the 
Papist,  but  moderates  both.     And  for  aught  I  yet  know,  'tis 
necessary  it   should.     For  if  their  religion  be  rebellion,  see 
what  it  will  produce.    Is  not  this  the  syllogism  ?    The  religion 
of  the   Papist  is  rebellion :  but  Christianity  is  the  religion 
of  the  Papist :  therefore  Christianity  is  rebellion.    I  may  not 
enlarge ;  but  you  may  see  more,  if  you  please,  in  my  speech 
in  the  Star-Chamber  r.     "  And  when  Mr.  Brown  in  the  sum 
of  his  charge  pressed  these  alterations  hard  against  me,  he 
did  not  so  much  as  mention,  that  I  had  the  King's  both 
warrant  and  command  to  all  that  I  did  in  that  particular  : 
and  besides,  urged  this  as  a  great  innovation,  '  because  the 
prayers  mentioned  had  continued  unaltered  for  the  space  of 
above  thirty  years.'     Not  remembering  therewhile,  that  the 
Liturgy  of  the  Church  established  by  Act  of  Parliament, 
must  be  taken  away,  or  altered,  though  it  hath  continued 
above  fourscore.     Nay,  and  Episcopacy  must  be  quite  abo 
lished,   though  it  have   continued  in  the   Church  of  Christ 
above  sixteen  hundred." 

The  ninth  charge  was  from  Sir  Edward  Hungerford,  who    IX, 
came  to  Lambeth  to  have  a  little  book  licensed  to  the  press, 

i'  [See  Abp.  Laud's  Speech  in  the  ''  P.  32.  [p.  75  in  marg.] 
Star-Chamber,  p.  34.  Edit.  1637;  and  *  P.  36.  [p.  76  in  marg.] 
p.  75  in  marg.  in  this  reprint.] 


Die  Deci-  The  author  was  Sir  Anthony  Hungerford s,  whether  Sir  EcU 
°*  ward's  grandfather  or  his  uncle,  I  remember  not  the  relation. 
He  says,  he  came  to  my  chaplain,  Dr.  Bray,  to  license  it. 
And,  '  that  Dr.  Bray  told  him  there  were  some  harsh  phrases 
in  it,  which  were  better  left  out,  because  we  were  upon  a  way 
of  winning  the  Papists/  First,  I  hope  I  shall  not  be  made 
answerable  for  my  chaplain's  words  too.  And  secondly,  I 
hope  there  is  no  harm  in  winning  the  Papists  to  the  Church 
of  England :  especially  if  so  easy  a  cure,  as  avoiding  harsh 
language,  would  do  it.  He  says,  '  my  chaplain  expressed  a 
dislike  of  'Guicciardin's  censure  of  Pope  Alexander  the  Sixth.' 
Sure  if  the  censure  be  false,  he  had  reason  to  except  against 
it;  if  true,  yet  to  publish  such  an  unsavoury  busi(196)ness 
to  the  common  people  1 He  says, '  he  came  and  com 
plained  to  me,  and  that  I  told  him  I  was  not  at  leisure,  but 
left  it  to  my  chaplain/  So  the  charge  upon  me  was,  '  that  359 
my  chaplain  was  in  an  error  concerning  this  book,  and  I 
would  not  redress  it.'  To  this  I  answered :  First,  that  my 
chaplain  was  dead,  and  I  not  knowing  the  reasons  which 
moved  him  to  refuse  licensing  this  book,  can  neither  confess 
him  to  be  in  an  error,  nor  yet  justify  him.  Secondly,  for 
my  own  refusing  to  meddle  with  it,  Sir  Edward  took  me  in 
a  time  of  business,  when  I  could  not  attend  it.  Thirdly,  if 
I  had  absolutely  refused  it,  and  left  it  to  my  chaplain,  I  had 
done  no  more  than  all  my  predecessors  did  before  me.  And 
Dr.  Featly  then  witnessed  to  the  Lords,  that  Archbp.  Abbot, 
my  immediate  predecessor,  and  to  whom  the  Doctor  was 
household  chaplain,  would  never  meddle  with  licensing  books, 
but  ever  referred  them  to  his  chaplains  :  and  Dr.  Mocket, 
another  of  his  chaplains,  (well  known  to  Dr.  Featly,)  suffered 

1  [Wharton  printed  this  passage  with  marks  of  omission,  as  though  the 
Archbishop  meant  to  add  more; — but  there  is  no  trace  of  this  in  the  MS. 
Abp.  Bancroft  here  notes,  '  Imperfect  period,  or  an  Aposiopesis.'] 

8   [Sir    Anthony   Hungerford    was  taken  to  be  licensed    in  16'35;    and 

originally  brought  up  as  a  Romanist,  on  the  Chaplain  refusing  to  license  it, 

but   changed   his   religion   in   1588.  was  printed  at  Oxford  in  1639.     The 

About  1607  he  wrote  the  book  men-  passages  which   were  objected  to  by 

tioned  in  the   text.     It  was  entitled,  the  licenser  are  given  by  Prynne  (Cant. 

"  The  Advice  of  a  Son  professing  the  Doom,    pp.  252—254).     Sir  Edward 

Religion   established  in   the  present  Hungerford  was  the  son,  not  nephew, 

Church  of  England,  to  his  dear  Mother  or  grandson,  of  Sir  Anthony.] 
a  Eoman  Catholic."     This  book  was 


for  a  book  sharply  * ;  yet  not  one  word  said  to  my  predecessor  Die  Deci- 
about  it.  Fourthly,  as  the  liberty  of  the  press  is  in  England,  m°-<luinto- 
and  of  the  books  which  are  tendered  to  the  press  l,  the  Arch 
bishop  had  better  grind,  than  take  that  work  to  his  own 
hands,  especially  considering  his  many  and  necessary  avoca 
tions.  Lastly,  no  man  ever  complained  to  me  in  this  kind, 
but  this  gentleman  only.  So  it  is  one  only  single  offence, 
if  it  be  any.  "  But  how  this  or  the  rest  should  be  treason 
against  Sir  Ed.  Hungerford,  I  cannot  yet  see.  And  so  I 
answered  Mr.  Brown ;  who  in  his  summary  charge  forgot  not 
this :  but  Mr.  Nicolas  laid  load  upon  me  in  his  reply,  in  such 
language  as  I  am  willing  to  forget." 

The  tenth  charge  was  out  of  a  paper  of  '  Considerations '  to  X. 
Dr.  Potter,  about  some  few  passages  in  his  answer  to  a  book 
intituled,  '  Charity  mistaken  V  The  business  this.  Dr.  Potter 
writ  to  me  for  my  advice :  I  used  not  to  be  peremptory ;  but 
put  some  few  things  back  to  his  further  consideration.  Of 
which,  three  were  now  charged  upon  me.  1.  The  first  was,  he 
used  this  phrase,  '  believe  in  the  Pope/  I  desired  him  to 
consider  of  cm.'  And  in  this  I  yet  know  not  wherein  I 
offend.  2.  The  second  was  this  phrase,  '  the  idol  of  Rome/ 
I  advised  him  to  consider  this  phrase  too,  that  men  might 
not  be  to  seek  what  that  idol  was.  "  And  here  Mr.  Nicolas 
cried  out  with  vehemeiicy,  e  that  every  boy  in  the  street  could 
tell  the  Pope  was  the  idol.'  I  had  not  Dr.  Potter's  book  now 
at  hand;  and  so  could  not  be  certain  in  what  sense  the 
Doctor  used  it ;  but  else,  as  many,  at  least,  think  the  Mass 
the  idol  of  Rome,  as  '  the  Pope  :'  unless  Mr.  Nicolas  his  boys 
in  the  streets  think  otherwise,  and  then  I  cannot  blame  him 
for  following  such  mature  judgments."  3.  The  third  was,  that 
I  bid  him  consider  whether  '  the  passage,  p.  27/  (as  I  remem- 

1  ['  and  of ...  the  press/  in  margin.] 

1  [Richard    Mocket   published,   in  u  [This  book  was  written   by  Ed- 

1616,  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  ward  Knott,  the  Jesuit,  to  which  Potter 

Thirty-nine   Articles,   &c.,   in   Latin,  put  forth  a  reply  in  1633,  entitled, 

omitting  the  first  clause  of  the  20th  '  Want  of  Charity  justly  charged,'  &c. 

Article.     The  book  was,  probably  on  He  was  preparing   a   second  edition 

this  account,  sentenced  to  be  burnt,  (which  appeared  in  1634),  for  which 

which  so  weighed  on  his  spirits  that  purpose  he  consulted  the  Archbishop 

he  died  soon  afterwards.  (Wood,  Ath.  on  several  points,  which  are  mentioned 

Ox.  vol.  ii.  p.  232,  and  Heylin's  Cypr.  in  Prynne'sCant.  Doom,  pp.  251,  252.] 
Angl.  p.  70.)] 


Die  Deci-  ber,)  '  did  not  give  as  much  power  to  the  Parliament  in  matter 
mo-quinto.  of  Doctrine,  as  the  Church.'  "  But  my  answer  to  this  I  shall 
put  off  to  the  charge  against  me  concerning  Parliaments, 
because  there  Mr.  Brown  began  with  this.  The  two  former 
he  charged  also,  and  I  answered  them  as  before.  But  he 
omitted,  that  I  obtained  of  the  Lords  the  reading  of  Dr. 
Potter's  letter  to  me,  by  which  he  drew  from  me  those  things 
which  I  determined  not,  but  only  put  to  his  second  thoughts 
and  consideration.  In  which  way  (I  humbly  conceive)  I 
cannot  be  in  crime,  though  I  were  in  error.  Here  ended 
the  business  of  this  day,  and  I  was  ordered  to  attend  again 
June  27. 


360  CAP.  XXXVIII. 


THIS  day  I  appeared  again. a ;  and  the  first  charge  laid  against  Junii  27, 
me,  was   '  my  chaplain  Dr.  Bray's  expungings   out   of  Dr.  Thursday. 
Featly's  Sermons/     The  same  charge  ad  verbum  which  was  Die  Veci- 
before  b,  and  I  give  it  the  same  answer.    These  repetitions  of   j 
the  same  things  being  only  to  increase  clamour,  and  to  fill 
more  men's  ears  with  it. 

(197)  The  second  charge  was  '  certain  expunctions  of  some  II. 
things  against  the  Papists  in  Dr.  Clark's  Sermons0/  The 
witness  which  swore  to  the  passages  left  out,  was  one  Mr. 
White,  a  minister d,  and  it  seems  some  near  acquaintance 
of  Dr.  Clark's.  But  first,  this  witness  is  single.  Secondly, 
he  brought  only  a  paper,  in  which  he  had  written  down  what 
was  expunged ;  but  Dr.  Clark's  Sermons  he  brought  not  with 
it :  so  'tis  not  impossible  he  might  be  mistaken  :  howsoever, 
I  not  having  the  book,  could  not  possibly  make  an  absolute 
and  a  perfect  answer.  Thirdly,  this  witness  confesses,  that 
Dr.  Weeks,  then  chaplain  to  my  Ld.  of  London,  had  the  view 
of  Dr.  Clark's  Sermons,  and  took  exceptions  against  some 
passages,  as  well  as  my  chaplain,  Dr.  Haywood,  did.  So  it 

a  [The  following  entry  in  the  Lords'  l>  [See  above,  p.  241.] 

Journals,  refers  to  a  point  not  noticed  c  [Dr.  Richard  Clerke  was  a  Fellow 

by  the  Archbishop : —  of  Christ's  Coll.  Cambridge.     He  was 

"  Die  Jovis,  viz.  27°  die  Junii.  one  of  the  translators  of  the  Bible, 

"  The  Committee  of  the  House  of  being  entrusted,  together  with  Dr.  Sa- 

Commons  began  to  press  the  evidence  ravia,  with  the  portion  from  the  Pen- 

of  the  Service  Book  of  Scotland.  tateuch  to  the  Book   of  Chronicles. 

"  The  Archbishop  desired  his  coun-  He  was  one  of  the  six  Preachers  of 
scl  might  be  heard  before  this  be  Canterbury.  His  Sermons  were  pub- 
given  in  evidence,  because  of  his  plea.  lished  after  his  death,  in  1637.  A  list 

"  Hereupon  they  withdrew  ;  and  the  of  the  passages  expunged  from  these 

House  taking  this  into  consideration,  Sermons   is   given  by  Prynne,  Cant, 

the  House  thought  it  fit  that  the  evi-  Doom,  pp.  257,  258,  261—268,  270, 

dence   of  this  particular  should    be  271.] 

reserved  to  the  House  of  Commons          d  [This  was  Charles  White,  one  of 

until    they   come   to   the    thirteenth  the  six  Preachers  of  Canterbury,  who 

article  ;  and  then  they  should  be  heard  wrote    the    Preface    to    Dr.  Clerke's 

on  both  sides,  concerning  this  parti-  Sermons.] 
cular  and  the  thirteenth  article."] 

282  H1ST011Y   OF   THE   TROUBLES   AND   TRIAL 

Die  Deci-  seems  there  was  cause  for  it.  Fourthly,  I  answer,  that  for 
mo-sexto.  tn^  an(j  £Qr  RJJ  other  of  like  nature,  iny  chaplain  must 
answer  for  his  own  act,  and  not  I.  He  is  living,  and  an  able 
man  j_  I  humbly  desire  he  may  be  called  to  his  account. 
For  'tis  not  possible  for  me  to  tell  your  Lps.  upon  what 
grounds  he  did  expunge  these  many  and  different  passages, 
which  are  instanced  against  me.  Lastly,  in  all  the  passages 
of  Dr.  Clark's  Sermons,  it  is  not  anywhere  distinguished, 
which  were  expunged  by  my  chaplain,  and  which  by  Dr. 
Weeks  :  so  that  the  charge  in  that  behalf  is  left  very  un 

For  the  passages  themselves,  as  they  are  many,  so  they 
are  such  as  may  easily  be  mistaken,  the  most  of  them.  And 
whether  Dr.  Clark  handled  them  in  such  manner  as  was  not 
justifiable,  either  against  Arminius  or  the  Papists,  cannot 
possibly  be  known,  till  each  place  in  the  book  be  examined 
for  the  '  thing/  and  my  chaplain,  Dr.  Hay  wood,  for  the  '  mean 
ing/  "  This  made  a  great  noise  in  Mr.  Brown's  summary 
charge  against  me,  he  alleging,  that  two  and  twenty  passages 
about  points  of  Popery  were  dashed  out  of  Dr.  Clark's  Ser 
mons.  To  which.  I  answered,  that  I  conceived  my  chaplain 
would  be  able  to  make  it  good,  there  were  two  hundred  left 
in  for  two  and  twenty  left  out.  And  that  they  which  were 
left  out,  were  not  some  way  or  other  justifiable  against  the 
Papists,  as  set  down  and  expressed  by  him.  And  if  so,  they 
are  better  out  than  in.  For  we  gain  nothing  by  urging  that 
against  the  Papists,  which,  when  it  comes  to  the  touch, 
cannot  be  made  good  against  them." 

One  passage  is  here  added  out  of  Dr.  Featly's  Sermons,  361 
p.  225  e,  where  he  inveighs  against  '  too  much  embellishing 
and  beautifying  the  church,  and  not  the  souls  of  men,'  &c. 
First,  if  there  be  not  a  care  to  beautify  the  soul,  let  men 
profess  what  religion  they  will,  'tis  a  just  exception,  and  I 
believe  no  fault  found  with  that.  But,  secondly,  for  the  over 
much  beautifying  of  the  church,  'tis  a  point  that  might  well 
be  left  out.  Little  necessity,  God  knows,  to  preach  or  print 
against  too  much  adorning  of  churches  among  us,  where  yet 
so  many  churches  lie  very  nastily  in  many  places  of  the  king 
dom,  and  no  one  too  much  adorned  to  be  found.  Nay,  the 
<•'  [Featley's  Clavis  Mystica,  Serin,  xvii.  p.  225. J 


very  consecration  of  churches  cried  down  (as  is  before  ex-  Die  Deci- 
pressed).    And  this  opinion,  'that  no  place  is  holy  but  during  m 
the  service  in  it/  made  Mr.  Culmer,  though  a  minister,  to  piss 
in  the  cathedral  church  of  Canterbury :    and  divers  others  to 
do  so,  and  more,  against  the  pillars  in  S.  Paul's  nearer  hand, 
as  may  daily  be  both  seen  and  smelt,  to  the  shame  of  that 
which  is  called  religion.     "  Here  Mr.  Nicolas  would  fain  have 
shovelled  it  to  the  outside  of  the  church  (which  had  been  bad 
enough),  but  it  was  the  inside  I  spake  of,  and  the  thing  is 

Then  an  instance  was  made  in  a  book  of  Dr.  Jones' f.  The 
witness  that  anything  was  expunged  out  of  this,  was  only 
Mr.  Chetwin.  And  he  confesses  that  this  book  was  licensed 
by  Dr.  Baker  %,  and  he  my  Ld.  of  London's  chaplain,  not 
mine.  Here  my  friends  at  the  bar  infer  '  that  Dr.  Baker  was 
preferred  by  me.'  First,  that's  not  so;  he  was  preferred  by 
his  own  lord.  Secondly,  if  he  had  been  preferred  by  me,  it 
could  have  made  no  charge,  unless  proof  had  been  made  that 
I  preferred  him  for  abusing  Dr.  Jones  his  book,  And  for 
the  s  docket/  which  is  the  only  proof  offered  that  I  preferred 
him,  I  have  already  showed,  that  that  is  no  proof.  Yea,  but 
they  say,  (  Dr.  Baker  was  employed  by  me  as  one  (198)  of  my 
visitors.'  And  what  then  ?  Must  I  be  answerable  for  every 
fault  that  is  committed  by  every  man  that  I  employ  in  my 
visitation,  though  it  be  a  fault  committed  at  another  time 
and  place,  though  I  humbly  desire  Dr.  Baker  may  answer  for 
himself,  before  I  acknowledge  any  fault  committed  by  him  ? 
"  And  though  I  conceive  this  answer  abundantly  satisfactory 
for  anything  that  may  concern  me,  yet  Mr.  Brown  omitted 
not  this  instance  against  me  V 

1  ['  And  though  .  .  .  against  me.'  on  opposite  page.] 

£  [Dr.  William  Jones,  of  East  Berg-  Christopher-le-Stock,  S.  Mary-at-Hill, 

holt,  in  Suffolk,  wrote  a  Commentary  and  Southwold  in  Essex.  On  Oct.  29, 

on  the  Epistles  to  Philemon  and  the  1636,  he  was  collated  to  the  Prebend 

Hebrews.  It  was  published  in  1635.  of  Totenhall  in  S.  Paul's  Church,  and 

A  list  of  the  passages  expunged  is  Oct.  20,  1638,  he  was  installed  Canon 

given  by  Prynne,  Cant.  Doom,  pp.  of  Windsor,  which  canonry  he  resigned 

255,  259,  260,  &c.]  on  being  appointed  Prebendary  of 

«  [Samuel  Baker,  of  Christ's  Coll.  Canterbury  in  1639.  He  assisted  in 

Cambridge.  He  was  successively  In-  the  Polyglott  Bible.  (Walker's  Suff'er- 

cumbent  of  S.  Margaret  Pattens,  S.  ings,  par.  ii.  p.  7.)] 


Die  Deci-  The  third  charge  was  personally  against  myself,  and  taken 
ou^  °f  mv  speech  in  the  Star-Chamber1'.  The  words  these: 
1  The  altar  is  the  greatest  place  of  God's  residence  upon  earth, 
greater  than  the  pulpit  ;  for  there  'tis  Hoc  est  corpus  meum, 
This  is  my  body ;  but  in  the  other  it  is  at  most  but  Hoc  est 
verbum  meum,  This  is  my  word :  and  a  greater  reverenco  is 
due  to  the  body,  than  the  word  of  the  Lord.'  Out  of  this 
place,  Mr.  Nicolas  would  needs  enforce,  that  I  maintained 
transubstantiation ;  because  I  say,  '  there,  'tis  Hoc  est  corpus 
meum.'  First,  I  perceive  by  him,  he  confounds  (as  too  many 
else  do)  Transubstantiation  with  the  Real  Presence,  whereas 
these  have  a  wide  difference.  And  Calvin  grants  a  real  and 
true  presence,  yea,  and  he  grants  realiter  too ;  and  yet  no 
man  a  greater  enemy  to  transubstantiation  than  he.  As  I 
have  proved  at  large  in  my  book  against  Fisher1,  and  had 
leave  to  read  the  passage  therein  to  the  Lords.  And  Mr.  302 
Perkins  avows  as  much  k.  And,  secondly,  the  word  '  there ' 
makes  nothing  against  this.  For  after  the  words  of  conse 
cration  are  past,  be  the  minister  never  so  unworthy,  yet  'tis 
infallibly  Hoc  est  corpus  meum  to  every  worthy  receiver.  So 
is  it  not  Hoc  est  verbum  meum,  from  the  pulpit  to  the  best  of 
hearers,  nor  by  the  best  of  preachers  since  the  Apostles'  time. 
"  And  as  preaching  goes  now,  scarce  is  anything  heard  from 
many  l  in  two  long  hours,  that  savours  of  the  word  of  God." 
And  St.  Paul  tells  us,  1  Cor.  xi.1,  of  a  great  sin  committed  in 
his  time,  l  of  not  discerning  the  Lord's  body,'  when  unworthy 
communicants  received  it.  Where  was  this  ?  Why  it  was 
'  there,'  at  the  holy  table  or  altar,  where  they  received,  yet 
did  not  (  discern.'  I  hope  for  all  this  St.  Paul  did  not  main 
tain  transubstantiation.  "  Mr.  Brown  in  his  summary  charge 
pressed  this  also  upon  me.  I  answered  as  before,  and  added, 
that  in  all  ages  of  the  Church,  the  touchstone  of  religion 
was  not  to  hear  the  word  preached,  but  to  communicate. 
And  at  this  day,  many  will  come  and  hear  sermons,  who 
yet  will  not  receive  the  communion  together.  And  as  I  call 

1  ['  from  many '  in  margin.] 

h  P.  47.  [p.  78  in  margin.]  k  Perkins,   Opera,   in   fol.   p.  590. 

5    Contr.  Fisher,  [sect.  35,]  p.  292,      [torn.  i.  pp.  582—586.  Cambr.  1608.  ] 
[Edit,  1639;  p.  327,  Oxf.  1849.]  '    1  Cor.  xi.  29. 


the  holy  table  the  greatest  place  of  God's  residence  upon  Die  Deci- 
earth  ;  so  doth  a  late  learned  divine  m  of  this  Church,  call  the  mP-sexto- 
celebration  of  the  Eucharist,  'the  crown  of  public  service, 
and  the  most  solemn  and  chief  work  of  Christian  assemblies  / n 
and  he  a  man  known  to  be  far  from  affecting  Popery  in  the 
least.     And   all  divines    agree    in   this,  which  our  Saviour 
Himself  teaches,  St.  Matt,  xxvi.,    t  that   there  is  the   same 
effect  of  the  passion  of  Christ,  and  of  this  blessed  sacrament 
worthily  received l  °." 

Another  passage  taken  out  of  my  speech  was,  'that  due 
reverence  be  given  to  God  and  to  His  altar  v.'  Hence  Mr. 
Nicolas  infers  again :  'This  reverence  is  one  joint  act,  there 
fore  His  divine  to  the  altar,  as  well  as  to  God,  and  so  idolatry/ 
First,  the  very  next  words  in  my  speech  are,  that  this  reve 
rence  to  the  altar  comes  ( far  short  of  divine  worship.'  What 
can  prevent  an  objection,  if  such  plain  words  cannot? 
Secondly,  having  thus  plainly  expressed  it,  he  may  infer  too, 
if  he  will,  that  I  do  not  then  worship  God.  For  this  reve 
rence  is  one  joint  act ;  but  'tis  confessed,  that  'tis  not  divine 
worship  to  the  altar,  and  therefore  not  to  God.  "But, 
thirdly,  this  gentleman,  by  his  favour,  understands  not  the 
mysteries  which  lie  hid  in  many  parts  of  divinity.  In  this 
for  one."  For  when  this  reverence  is  performed,  'tis  to  God 
as  to  the  Creator,  and  so  divine :  but  'tis  only  '  toward/  not 
'to'  the  altar,  and  so  far  short.  And  though  in  outward  per 
formance  it  be  one  joint  act,  yet  that  which  is  not e  separated/ 
is,  and  must  be  distinguished  one  from  the  other.  To  make 
a  good  work  acceptable  to  God,  there  must  be  both  faith  and 
charity :  they  cannot  be  separated  one  from  the  other ;  what, 

1  ['And  as  I  ...  worthily  received.'  on  opposite  page.] 

m  [Herbert  Thorndike  was  at  this  was  a   stall   in   Westminster  Abbey, 

time  Fellow  of  Trinity  College,  Cam-  which  he  held  till  his  death  in  1672. 

bridge.     He  held  the  living  of  Clay-  (Todd's  Life  of  Walton,  vol.  i.  pp.  209 

brooke  in  Leicestershire,  and  was  soon  seq.)] 

after  Rector  of  Barley,  and,  in  16-13,  "  Thorndike, 'Of  Assemblies,' c.viii. 

failed  in  obtaining  the  Mastership  of  p.  260,  §  7.   London,  1642.     [Works, 

Sidney  Sussex  College,  though  elected  vol.  i.  p.  274.  Oxf.  1844.] 

by  a  majority  of  votes.     During  the  °  St.  Matt.   xxvi.    26.     "  Idem  est 

Rebellion  he  was  employed  as  a  cop.d-  effectus  Passionis  Christ!  et  Eucharis- 

jutor  of  Walton  in  editing  the  Poly-  tiae."  -—  [S.]  Thorn.   [Aquin.   Summ. 

glott,  and  was  supported  by  the  muni-  Theol.]  p.  iii.  q.  Ixxix.  A.  1.  c. 

ficence  of  Lord  Scudaniore.    After  the  •»  P.  49.  [p.f78  in  marg.] 
Restoration,   his    highest    preferment 


Die  Deci-  shall  they  not  therefore  be  distinguished  1  ?  He  that  speaks 
8exto'  (saith  St.  Aug.),  by  one  joint  act  sends  out  his  voice  and  his 
word r ;  separated  they  cannot  be,  shall  not  they  be  distin 
guished  therefore  ?  But  I  have  lived  long  enough l,  and 
taken  pains  to  small  purpose,  if  Mr.  Nicolas  or  any  layman 
else,  at  his  by  (199)  and  leisure  hours,  from  a  busy  profession, 
shall  be  able  to  teach  me  in  that  which  I  have  laboured  all 
my  life.  And  God  bless  the  poor  bishops  arid  clergy  of  363 
England,  if  falling  into  a  storm  (as  I  now  am)  they  must  have 
such  judges  as  Mr.  Nicolas. 

IV.  The  fourth  charge,  '  is  the  licensing  of  Sales',  and  other 
books  which  had  Popery  in  them 2,  by  my  chaplain,  Dr.  Hay- 
wood3.  1.  To  this  Mr.  Pryn  (who  is  the  single  witness)  says, 
'  that  he  tendered  a  bill  to  the  then  Ld.  Keeper  against  my 
chaplain  for  licensing  this  book,  and  that  his  Lp.  refused  it.' 
If  the  Ld.  Keeper  Coventry  refused  his  bill,  I  believe,  were 
he  living,  he  would  assign  just  cause  why  he  did  it.  But 
whatever  cause  he  had,  it  concerns  not  me,  that  he  rejected 
the  bill.  Mr.  Pryn  says  further,  'that  this  book  of  Sales' 
was  printed  heretofore,  but  purged  first  by  Dr.  James ;  but 
licensed  now  by  Dr.  Haywood,  not  according  to  that  purga 
tion,  but  with  all  the  points  of  Popery  in.'  For  this  he 
produces  Mr.  Oakes,  whose  son  printed  it.  And  says  further, 
'  that  his  corrector  at  the  press  found  fault  with  some  pas 
sages,  and  thereupon  he  was  sent  to  Dr.  Haywood,  who 
returned  answer  (as  they  say)  that  if  he  licensed  it,  he  would 
justify  it.  And  that  his  son  told  him  this  V  First,  my  Lords, 
this  under-testimony  of  Mr.  Oakes  produced  by  Mr.  Pryn, 
is  nothing  but  a  hearsay  from  his  son,  who  is  now  dead,  and 
cannot  be  examined,  and  while  he  was  living  ran  away  and 
would  not  be  examined.  Secondly,  this  was  a  most  notable 
piece  of  villany  practised  against  my  chaplain,  and  through 
his  sides  against  me.  It  was  thus,  my  Lords :  Whether  the 

1  ['enough,'  in  margin.]  2  ['  and  other  .  .  .  them  '  in  margin.] 

i  "In  bono  opere  Deo  acceptabili,  "  Quamvis  utmmque  simul,  qui  loqui- 

fides  et  charitas  distinguuntur,  non  tur,  faciat."] 

scparantur."  '  [See   Laud's   Letter   in   Hist,  of 

r  "  Qui  loquitur,  sirnul  facit  vocem  Chancellorship,  Works,  vol.  v.  p.  167.] 

et  verbum." — St.  Aug.  lib.  i.   de  Gen.  l  [See  Prynne's  account  of  this  busi- 

ad  Lit.  cap.  15.  [Op.,  torn.  iii.  col.  215  ness,  Cant.  Doom,  pp.  186,  187.] 

B.     S.  Augustine's  exact  words   are  :  * 


bill  were  rejected  or  no,  I  cannot  tell;  but  the  complaint  of  Die  Deci- 
printing  this  book  came  publicly  into  the  Star-Chamber.  m 
And  then  was  the  first  time  that  ever  I  heard  of  it.  I  then 
humbly  desired  their  Lps.  that  Dr.  Haywood  might  answer 
whatever  he  had  done  amiss,  either  there  or  where  they 
pleased.  The  court  presently  commanded  Mr.  Attorney 
Bankes  to  call  all  parties  before  him,  examine  them  thoroughly, 
and  then  give  his  account  what  he  found,  that  the  court 
might  proceed  further  according  to  justice.  Dr.  Haywood 
appeared,  and  showed  Mr.  Attorney  how  he  had  corrected 
Sales  in  all  Popish  points  before  he  licensed  it.  But  young 
Oakes,  and  he  which  brought  Sales  to  be  licensed  (who  was 
then  thought  to  be  some  Jesuited  recusant,  and,  as  I  remem 
ber,  lodged  for  that  time  of  printing,  in  Oakes  his  house  u), 
ran  both  a^ay,  or  hid  their  heads,  and  would  not  be  found. 
And  this  was  a  mere  plot  of  this  recusant,  if  not  priest,  to 
have  Sales  printed,  with  all  his  points  of  Popery  in  him,  to 
work  mischief  to  my  chaplain  and  myself.  And  young  Oakes 
was  in  all  likelihood  well  paid  for  his  pains.  This  account 
Mr.  Attorney  brought  into  that  court,  and  this  relation  Dr. 
Haywood  (who  I  obtained  might  be  after  sent  for)  attested 
at  this  bar*. 

One  circumstance  my  old  decayed  memory  mistook.  For 
I  thought,  and  so  at  first  told  the  Lords,  that  for  this  clamour 
raised  upon  him  in  this  way,  I  did  soon  after  dismiss  him  my 
house.  But  after,  I  found  that  he  was  gone  out  of  my  house 
before.  Howsoever  I  left  him,  without  any  mediation,  to  the 
justice  of  the  court.  And  here  I  may  not  forget  that  which 
I  then  observed  to  the  Lords,  that  whereas  'tis  urged,  that 
many  points  of  Popery  have  passed  the  press ;  'tis  no  wonder, 
if  such  art  be  used  as  was  here  to  get  out  Sales.  And  this 
further  is  observable,  that  all  these  '  quotations  of  Popish 
opinions/  mentioned  here  to  fill  up  the  noise,  are  out  of  four 
or  five  books  at  the  most,  of  which  more  are  out  of  this  Sales 
364  than  all  the  rest.  "And  called  in  he  was,  as  soon  as  known. 
Which  Mr.  Brown  in  the  sum  of  his  charge  acknowledges." 

u  [His  name   was   Burrowes.     See  to  Lord  Wentworth  (afterwards  Earl 

Laud's  Letter  mentioned  above,  note s.]  of  Straff brd).    (Straffbrd's  Letters,  vol. 

x  [This  statement  agrees  with  what  ii.  p.  74.)] 
is  mentioned  in  a  letter  from  Garrard 


Die  Deci-  2.  After  Sales,  the  next  instance  was  in  a  book  intituled, 
mo-sexto.  ,  Christ's  Epistle  to  the  devout  Reader  >V  Four  particular 
points  were  urged  out  of  this  :  but  neither  I  nor  my  chaplains 
had  aught  to  do  with  it.  For  it  was  licensed  at  London- 
House  by  Dr.  Weeks.  Nor  was  there  ever  any  complaint 
brought  to  me  to  have  it  called  in :  nor  was  any  such  proof 
so  much  as  offered. 

(200)  3.  The  third  instance  was  of  a  book  called  'The 
Female  Glory z/  where  Mr.  Pryn  (who  is  single  again)  said 
that  '  Dr.  Heylin  answered  Mr.  Burton,  and  justified  all  the 
passages  in  this  book.'  And  added,  'that  this  was  by  my 
direction.'  But  upon  my  motion  at  the  bar  concerning  the 
boldness  of  this  oath,  Mr.  Pryn  recalled  himself,  and  said 
that  I  appointed  him  to  answer  Mr.  Burton.  But  it  is  one 
thing  to  appoint  him  to  answer  Mr.  Burton :  and  another  to 
direct  him  to  justify  all  passages  in  the  'Female  Glory/ 

4.  The  fourth  instance  was  in  a  letter  sent  to  me  from  one 
Croxton,  a  young  divine  in  Ireland a.  He  was  bred  in 
St.  John's  College  in  Oxford.  At  the  Lord  Mount-Norris b 
his  entreaty,  I  sent  Croxton  into  Ireland  to  be  his  chaplain. 
If  he  miscarried  there,  I  could  not  help  it,  nor  hinder  his 
writing  of  a  letter  to  me,  nor  prescribe  what  he  should  write 
in  it.  But,  to  my  remembrance,  I  never  heard  of  any  mis 
carriage  of  his  in  matter  of  religion.  And  whether  he  be 
living  or  dead,  I  know  not.  That  letter  indeed  hath  a  cross 

y  [Prynne  gives  the  title  of  the  book,  ever    been   published.     (Wood,  Ath. 

'An  Epistle,   or   Exhortatory   Letter  Ox.  iii.  33.)] 

from  Jesus  Christ  for  every  Faithful  a  [James  Croxton  Avas  elected  from 

Soul  devoutly  affected,'  and  says  that  Merchant  Tailors'  School  to  S.  John's, 

the   author  was   John  Lanspergius,  a  Oxford,  in  1622.    (Wilson,  Merchant 

Carthusian.      (Cant.   Doom,    pp.186,  Tailors' School,  p.  1193.)     He  is  men- 

188.)]  tioned   several   times    in    the    corre- 

'•  ['  The  Female  Glory;  or,  the  Life  spondence   of  Archbishop   Laud  and 

of  the  Virgin  Mary,'   was   published  Lord  Straffbrd.     He  took  an   active 

by  Anthony  Stafford  in  1635.     In  the  part  in  opposing  the  Irish  Articles  in 

second  edition  it  was  entitled,  'The  the  Irish  Convocation  of  1634.     His 

Precedent  of  Female  Perfection ;  or,'  letter  mentioned  in  the  text,  which 

&c.  It  was  attacked  b}r  Henry  Burton,  speaks  of  his  practice  in  inviting  his 

in  his  sermon  entitled,  '  For  God  and  people    to    confession,    is    given    in 

the  King,'  pp.  123  —  125,  and  was  dc-  Prynne    ^Cant.   Doom,  pp.  194,  195). 

fended   by  Heylin  in  his  '  Brief  and  On  his  leaving  Lord  Mountnorris  ne 

Moderate  Answer  to  Henry  Burton,'  was   taken    under    the    patronage    of 

pp.  123, 124.    Wood  mentions  that  he  Lord  Strafford  and  Bishop  Bramhall. 

had  seen  in  MS.  '  A  just  Apology  and  (Bramhall's  Works,  vol.  i.  p.  Ixxxiii.)] 

Vindication  of  a  Book  entitled,  "  Tho  h  [Francis  Annesley,  created  Baron 

Female  Glory," '   by  Stafford  himself,  Mountnorris  in  1628.] 
but  he  did  not  know  whether  it  had 

'    OF  ARCHBISHOP  LAUD.  280 

at  the  top  of  it.     But  then  was  another  letter  of  his  showed  Die  D^ci- 
without  a  cross,  in  which  he  calls  Rome  monstrum  abominan-  l 
dum.     Howsoever,  I  conceive  all  this  is  nothing  to  me c. 

5.  The  fifth  instance  was  a  book,  which  they  said  was 
licensed  by  Dr.  Weeks.    And  if  so,  then  not  by  my  chaplain. 
Eut  upon  perusal,  I  find  no  licence  printed  to  it,  nor  to  any 
of  the  other,  but  only  to  Sales',  which  is  answered. 

6.  The  sixth  instance  was  in  Bp.  Mountague's  books,  the 
Gaggd,   and  the  Appeal6.     Here  they  said  that  '  Dr.  White 
told  Dr.  Featly  that  five  or  six  bishops  did  allow  these  books/ 
Bat  he  did  not  name  me  to  be  one  of  them.     Then  Mr.  Pryii 
urged  upon  his  oath,  'that  these  books  were  found  in  my 
study/     And  I  cannot  but  bless  myself  at  this  argument. 
For,  I  have  Bellarmine  in  my  study f;  therefore  I  am  a  Papist  : 
or,  I  have  the  Alcaron  in  my  study ;  therefore  I  am  a  Turk ; 
is  as  good  an  argument  as  this  :  I  have  Bp.  Mountague's  books 
in  my  study ;  therefore  I  am  an  Arminian.     May  Mr.  Pryn 
have  books  in  all  kinds  in  his  study,  and  may  not  the  Archbp. 
of  Canterbury  have  them  in  his  ?     Yea,  but  he  says,  '  there 
is  a  letter  of  the  bishop's  to  me,  submitting  his  books  to  my 
censure?/     This  letter  hath  no  date  ;  and  so  belike  Mr.  Pryn 
thought  he  might  be  bold  both  with  it  and  his  oath,  and 
apply  it  to  what  books  he  pleased.     But,  as  God  would  have 
it,  there  are  circumstances  in  it  as  good  as  a  date.     For  'tis 
therein  expressed,  that  he  was  now  ready  to  remove  from 
Chichester  to  Norwich ;  therefore,  he  must  needs  speak  of 
submitting  those  his  books  to  me,  which  were  then  ready  to 
be  set  out,  which  were  his  Origincs  Ecclesiastic^,  not  the 

c  [Laud,  in  his  letter  to  Strafford,  commonly  called  Archbishop  Marsh's 

July  20,  1638,  expressly  states  his  dis-  Library,  Dublin,  copiously  annotated 

appi-oval  of  Croxton's  conduct  in  the  in  his  own  hand.     The  volumes  origi- 

matter  of  confession.]  nally  belonged  to  Bishop  Stillingfleet, 

d  [The  title  of  the  book  is,  '  A  Gagg  whose  whole  library  was  purchased  by 

for   the   New    Gospel?     No,  a   New  Archbishop   Marsh.     These  notes   of 

Gagg  for  an  Old  Goose,  &c.    London,  Archbishop  Laud  are  referred  to  by 

1624.']  Bishop  Stillingfleet  in  the  Preface  to 

e  [The  title  of  the  book  is, 'Appello  his  Discourse  on  the  Idolatry  of  the 
Caesarem,  a  just  Appeal  from  two  un-  Church  of  Rome.] 
just  Informers.  London,  1625.'  The  *  [This  letter  is  recorded  in  Prynne, 
proceedings  against  Montagu  are  no-  Cant.  Doom,  p.  351,  who  mentions 
ticed  in  the  Notes  to  the  Diavy,  that  it  was  received  by  the  Arch- 
Works,  vol.  iii.  pp.  167,  178,  180,  bishop,  March  29,  1638,  thus  bearing 
182.]  out  the  statement  below  in  the  text.] 

{  [The  copy  of  Bellarmine's  works  h  [This  was  the  second  part  of  the 

which  belonged  to  Archbishop  Laud  '  Origines   Ecclesiasticse/   which  was 

is  now  in  the  library  of  S.  Sepulchre's,  published  in  1640,  the  first  part  having 
LAUD. — VOL.  iv. 


Die  Peci-   Gagg,  nor  the  Appeal,  which  are  the  books  charged,  and  3G5 
xto*    which  were  printed  divers  years  before  he  was  made  a  bishop ; 
and  my  receipt  endorsed  upon  it  is  Mar.  29,  16381.     And 
I  hope  Mr.  Nicolas  will  not  call  this  '  the  colour  of  an  answer,' 
as  he  hath  called  many  of  the  rest  given  by  me. 

7.  The  seventh  instance  was  in  a  book  licensed  by  Dr. 
Martin1,  then  my  chaplain  in  London-House k.  '  This  book/ 
Mr.  Pryn  says,  *  was  purposely  set  out  to  countenance  Armi- 
iiianism,  as  if  it  had  been  some  work  of  moment,  whereas  it 
was  answered  twice  in  the  Queen's  time1/  If  Dr.  Martin 
did  this,  'tis  more  than  I  remember ;  nor  can  I  so  long  after 
give  any  account  of  it.  But  Dr.  Martin  is  living,  and  in 
town,  and  I  humbly  desired  he  might  be  called  to  answer. 
He  was  called  the  next  day,  and  gave  this  account. 

The  account  is  ivantiny ;  a  space™  left  for  it,  but  not  filled  up. 

Mr.  Pryn  says  further,  '  that  after  this  he  preached  Ar- 
minianism  at  S.  Paul's  Cross/  Why  did  not  Mr.  Pryn  come 
then  to  me,  and  acquaint  me  with  it  ?  which  neither  he  nor 
any  man  else  did.  And  I  was  in  attendance  at  court,  whither 
I  could  not  hear  him.  And  the  charge  which  came  against 
him  upon  the  next  day's  hearing,  was  this  and  no  more, — 
'  that  one  then  preached  at  the  Cross  universal  redemption  / 
but  he  that  gave  testimony  knew  him  not;  only  he  says, 
'  one  told  him  'twas  Dr.  Martin  V 

1  ['and  my  receipt .  .  .  1638.'  in  margin.] 

2  ['  And  the  charge  .  .  .  Dr.  Martin.' on  opposite  page.] 

appeared  in  1636.     It  appears  from  godly  English  Bishops,  holy  Martyrs, 

Montagu's  letter  that  the  portion  of  the  and   others,   concerning   God's   Elee- 

book  which  he  submitted  to  the  Arch-  tion,  and  the  Merits  of  Christ's  Death  ; 

bishop's  censure  was  that  which  re-  set  forth  by  I.  A.  of  Ailward  (a  late 

lated  to  the  sacrifice  of  the  altar.]  Seminary   Priest);    and  printed  for 

5  [Dr.  Martin  was  Master  of  Queens'  Samuel  Nealand.  1631.] 
College,  Cambridge,  Rector  of  Hough-  '  [Prynne  asserts  that  this  book  was 
ton  Conquest  and  of  Dinnington,  and  written  by  Champneys,  and  that  it 
Dean  of  Ely.  He  suffered  severely  was  answered  by  John  Veron  and 
during  the  Rebellion,  and  died  in  Au-  Eobert  Crowley.  (Cant.  Doom,  pp. 
gust,  1661.  A  long  account  of  his  168,  169.)  Crowley 's  answer  is  men- 
sufferings  is  given  in  Lloyd's  Me-  tioned  under  his  name  by  Wood,  (Ath. 
moirs,  and  Walker's  Sufferings.  The  Ox.  i.  544.)] 

Archbishop  bequeathed   him   by  his          m  [This  space  is  a  very  short  one, 

will  his  '  ring,  with  a  hyacinth  in  it.']  only  leaving  room  for  a  single  word, 

k  [The  book  licensed  by  Dr.  Martin  unless  the  Archbishop  meant  to  write 

was,  '  An  Historical  Narrative  of  the  on  the  opposite  page.] 
Judgment  of  some  most  learned  and 


8.  The  last  instance  was  '  of  a  Bible  commonly  sold,  with  Die  Deci- 
a  Popish  table  at  the  end  of  it  V     This  is  more  than  I  know,  m°-sexto- 
or  ever  heard  till  now ;  nor  was  any  complaint  ever  brought 
to  me  of  it.     And  I  cannot  know  all  things  that  are  done 
abroad  for  gain ;  for  that  will  teach  them  to  conceal,  as  well 
as  move  them  to  act.     Yet  one  of  the   (201)  Popish  heads 
mentioned  in  that  table  was   confirmation,  which  is  com 
manded  in  our  Church  Liturgy,  and  ratified  by  law. 

Here  this  day  ended0,  and  I  was  ordered  to  appear  again  Julii  4. 
July  4.  That  day  I  received  a  note,  under  Mr.  Nicolas  his 
hand,  that  they  meant  to  proceed  upon  the  8,  9,  10,  11, 
12,  and  14th  Original  Articles,  and  the  sixth  and  seventh 
Additionals.  The  last  warrant  for  other  Articles  came  under 
Sergeant  Wild's  hand,  and  Mr.  Nicolas  signing  this,  it  seems, 
mistook  •  for  the  eighth  and  ninth  Original  Articles  are  in 
part  proceeded  on  before.  Now  they  go  forward  with  these, 
and  then  on  to  the  rest,  which  I  will  write  down  severally  as 
they  come  to  them1. 

The  same  day,  being  Thursday,  all  my  books  at  Lambeth 
were,  by  order  of  the  House  of  Commons,  taken  away  by 

Mr secretary  to  the  Eight  Honourable  the  E.  of 

Warwick,  and  carried  I  know  not  whither,  but  are  (as  'tis 
commonly  said)  for  the  use  of  Mr.  Peters  P.  Before  this  time, 
some  good  number  of  my  books  were  delivered  to  the  use  of 
the  Synod,  the  ministers  which  had  them  giving  no  catalogue 
under  their  hands,  which  or  how  many  they  had.  And  all 
this  was  done  contrary  to  an  order  of  the  Lords,  bearing  date 
Novemb.  9,  1642,  for  the  safe  keeping  of  my  books  there q; 
and  before  I  was  convicted  of  any  crime.  This  day  also 
I  received  an  order,  which  put  off  my  hearing  to  the  next 

1  ['  The  last  warrant  .  ,  .  them.'  on  opposite  page.] 

n  [See  this  point  urged  by  Prynne,  Dr.  Featly,  Dr.  Clerke,  and  the  rest  of 

(Cant.  Doom,  pp.  243,  244.)]  the  books  that  were  given  in  evidence 

0  [The  following  order  was  made  at  this  day  against  the  Archbishop  of 

the  afternoon  sitting  of  the  House  of  Canterbury,    with    the    expungings  ; 

Lords  :—  and  deliver  their  judgments,  whether 

"  Die  Jovis,  27°  die  Junii,  post  me-  they  are  fit  to  be  printed  with  the 

ridiem.  expungings."] 

"  Ordered,  that  Mr.  Marshall,  Mr.  P  [See  above,  p.  66,  note  m.] 

Herle,  Mr.  Vynes,  and  Mr.  Chambers,  i  [See  Diary  at  that  date,  Works, 

are  to  view  and  peruse  the  sermons  of  vol.  iii.  p.  247.] 

TJ   2 


CAP.  XXXIX.  306 


I.  THIS  day  I  appeared  again ;  and  the  first  charge  against 
Julii  5,  me  was,  '  that  I  had  preferred  none  to  bishoprics,,  deaneries, 
Friday.  prebends,  'and  benefices,  but  men  popishly  affected,  or  other- 
^e.  wise  unworthy/  And  some  they  named. 

septimo.          1.  As  first,  Dr.  Manwaring,  <  disabled  by  the  Parliament  V 

2.  Secondly,  Mr.  Mountague,  (  excepted  against  by  Parlia- 
mentV     But  for  these  no  proof  was  now  brought.     They 
referred  themselves  to  what  was  said  before0,  and  so  do  I. 
And  where  they  go  to  prove  only  by  dockets,  I  desire  it  may 
still  be  remembered  that  the  docket  is  a  full  proof  who  gave 
order  for  drawing  the  bill  at  the  Signet  Office ;  but  no  proof 
at  all  who  procured  the  preferment. 

3.  Thirdly,  Bishop  Corbet d.     But  the  Earl  of  Dorset0  got 
my  Ld.  Duke  of  Buckingham  to  prefer  him,  to  make  way  for 
Dr.  Duppa,   his    deserving    chaplain,    into    Christ    Church f. 
Nor  was  anything  charged  against  Dr.  Corbet,  but  that  he 
was  preferred  by  me. 

4.  Fourthly,  Bp.  Pierce  °;  against  whom  there  was  no  proof 
offered  neither.     And  he  is  living  to  answer  it,  if  any  be. 

5.  Nor  was  there  now  any  proof  offered  against  Bp.Wrenh, 
who  was  named  also ;  at  the  least,  not  till  he  was  made  a 

•  [See  Works,  vol.  iii.  pp.  207,  213.]  Vice-Chancellor    of    Oxford,   1621— 

b  [Ibid,  pp.167,  178,  180.]  1623.     He  was  successively  Dean  of 

c  [See  above,  p.  273.]  Chester  and  Peterborough,  Bishop  of 

d  [Richard  Corbet,  elected  Bishop  Peterborough,    and   Bishop   of   Bath 

of  Oxford  Sept.  24,  1628,    (not  July  and  Wells.     He  has  been  already  no- 

30,  1629,  as  stated  by  Wood,  Ath.  Ox.  ticed  in  connexion  with  the  Becking- 

ii.  594 ;)  he  was  elected  Bishop  of  Nor-  ton  case  and  the  Book  of  Sports.    See 

wich  April  7,  1632,  and  died  in  1635.]  above,  pp.  121,  133.] 

e  [Edward  Sackville.]  h  [Successively  Bishop  of  Hereford, 

f   [Duppa  became  Dean  of  Christ  Norwich,  and   Ely.     He  was  during 

Church,  October  24,  1628.    (Rymer,  the  great  Rebellion  imprisoned  nearly 

Feed.  VIII.  Hi.  28.)]  twenty  years.     At  the  Restoration  he 

«  [William  Pierce  first  came  into  regained  his  Bishopric  of  Ely,   and 

public  notice   by  opposing  the  Cal-  died  in  1667.] 
vinistic  party,  during  the  time  he  was 


bishop.     So  if   I  did   prefer  him,   it   seems  I  did  it  when  Die 
nothing  was  laid  against  him.     And  if  after  he  had  his  pre- 
ferment  he  did  anything  unworthily,,  that  could  not  I  foresee ; 
and  he  is  living  to  answer  it. 

6.  The  sixth  was  Bishop  Lindsy1,  a  man  known  to  be  of 
great  and  universal  learning,  but  preferred  by  the  then  Lord 
Treasurer  Portland-),  not  by  me.     Him  they  charged  with 
Arminianism.     The  witnesses  two :    the  first,   Mr.  Smart k; 
he  is  positive.     He  was  his  fellow  prebendary  at  Durham. 
There  was  animosity  between  them.     "  And  Smart  not  able 
to  judge  of  Arminianism."      Secondly,   Mr.  Walker1,   who 
could   say  nothing  but  that  he  heard  so  much  from  some 
ministers  and  Dr.  Bast  wick m.     "  So  here  is  as  learned  a  man 
as  Christendom  had  any  of  his  time,  debased  in  this  great 
and  honourable  court  by  ignorance  and  a  hearsay  ;  and  that 
when  the  man  is  gone  to  that  which  should  be  his  quiet,  the 

7.  The  seventh  was  Archbishop  Neilen,  a  man  well  known 
to  be  as  true  to,  and  as  stout  for,  the  Church  of  England 
established  by  law  as  any  man  that  came  to  preferment  in  it. 
Nor  could  his  great  enemy,  Mr.  Smart,  say  anything  now 
against   him  but  a  hearsay  from  one   Dr.  Moor,   of  Win 
chester0.     And  I   cannot  but  profess,  it  grieves   me  much 
to   hear  so  many  honest  and  worthy  men   so   used,  when 
the   grave  hath  shut  up  their  mouths  from  answering  for 

8.  The  next   was  Dr.  Cosin,  to  be   Dean   of    Peterbo 
rough  P.     I  named  four  of  his  Majesty's  chaplains  to  him, 

1  [Augustine  Lindsell.     See  a  fur-  m  [John  Bastwick,  of  \vhom  more 

ther  notice  of  him,  vol.  iii.  p.  152.]  in  vol.  vi.] 

J  [See  above,  p.  227,  note  s.]  n  [Richard  Neile  was  successively 

k  [Peter  Smart  was  collated  to  the  Bishop  of  Rochester,  Lichfield,  Lin- 
sixth  stall  in  Durham  Cathedral,  Dec.  coin,  Durham,  "Winchester,  and  Arch- 
30,1609;  and  July  6,  1614,  removed  bishop  of  York.  He  died  Oct.  31, 
to  the  fourth.  He  had  been  deprived  1640.] 

of  his  stall  for  a  seditious  sermon.     At  °  [This  was  Robert  Moor,  Preben- 

the  beginning  of  the  Long  Parliament  dary  of  Winchester.     Wood  informs 

lie  was   restored  to  his  preferments,  us  that  he  had  '  divers  contests  with 

and   in   his  turn  presented    articles  Neile,   his  Diocesan,    for  his    intro- 

against  Bishop  Cosin.    (Sec  above,  p.  ducing   certain  ceremonies   into   the 

40,  note  i.)     He  appears  to  have  lived  Cathedral  at  Winchester.'  (Ath.  Ox.  ii. 

till  1652.  (Wood,  Ath.  Ox. iii.  40.)  See  654.)] 

Smart's  testimony  against  Lindsell,  P    [Cosin  was    installed    Dean    of 

Prynne,  Cant.  Doom,  p.  360.]  Peterborough,  Nov.  7,  1640.   Thapre- 

1  [George  Walker.  See  above,  p.  82 .]  ferments  he  held  in  the  north  were 


Die  as  he  had  commanded  me.     And  the  King  pitched  upon  Dr.  367 

septimo".  Cosens,  in  regard  all  the  (202)  means  he  then  had  lay  in  and 
about  Duresm,  and  was  then  in  the  Scots'  hands ;  so  that  he 
had  nothing  but  forty  pound  a-year  by  his  headship  in  Peter- 
House  to  maintain  himself,  his  wife,  and  children. 

9.  The  ninth  was  Dr.  Potter,  a  known  Arminian,  to  the 
deanery  of  Worcester  i.     "What  proof  of  this  ?     Nothing  but 
the  docket.     And  what  of  the  crime?     Nothing  but  Dr. 
Featly's  testimony,,  who  says  no  more  but  this,  that  Dr.  Potter 
was  at  first  against  Arminianism  (that's  absolute),  but  after 
wards  he  defended  it,  as  he  hath  heard  :   (there's  a  hearsay.) 

10.  The  tenth  was  Dr.  Baker'. 

11.  The  eleventh,  Dr.  Weeks8.    Both  very  honest  and  able 
men,  but  preferred  by  their  own  lord,  the  Ld.  Bishop  of 

12.  The  twelfth  was  Dr.  Bray t.     He  had  been  my  chaplain 
above  ten  years  in  my  house.     I  found  him  a  very  able  and 
an  honest  man,  and  had  reason  to  prefer  him  to  be  able  to 
live  well;  and  I  did  so.     Here  is  nothing  objected  against 
him,  but  his  expungiugs  and  not  expungings  of  some  books  ; 
which,  if  he  were  living,  I  well  hope  he  would  be  able  to  give 
good  account  for. 

13.  The  thirteenth,  Dr.  Heylinu.     He  is  known  to  be  a 
learned  and  an  able  man ;  but  for  his  preferment,  both  to  be 
his  Majesty's  chaplain  and  for  that   which  he  got  in  that 
service,  he  owes  it  under  God  to  the  memory  of  the  Earl  of 
Danby,  who  took  care  of  him  in  the  University. 

14.  After  these  they  named  some,  whom  they  said  I  pre 
ferred  to  be  the  King's  chaplains.     The  witness  here   Mr. 
Oldsworth,  the  Lord  Chamberlain's   secretary v.     He  says, 
( the  power  and  practice  of  naming  chaplains  was  in  the  Lord 
Chamberlain  for  these  25  years.'     And  I  say,  'tis  so  still,  for 

the  Archdeaconry  of  the  East  Riding,  r  [See  above,  p.  283.] 
the  Rectory  of  Brancepeth,  and  a  stall  s  [See  above,  p.  239.] 
in  Durham  Cathedral.]  *  [  See  above,  p.  85.] 

*  [Christopher  Potter,   Provost  of         ll  [Ibid.] 

Queen's  College,  Oxford,  was  ap-  T  [Michael  Oldsworth,  of  Magdalen 
pointed  chaplain  to  the  King,  and  College,  appointed  secretary  to  Philip 
nominated  to  the  Deanery  of  Worces-  Earl  of  Pembroke  and  Montgomery 
ter  in  the  year  1635,  from  which  he  was  in  Oct.  1637.  He  had  been  pro- 
removed  to  the  Deanery  of  Durham  viously  secretary  to  William  Earl  of 
in  January  1645,  but  died  before  his  Pembroke.  (Strafford  Letters,  vol.  ii. 
installation.  (Wood,  Ath.  Ox.  iii.  p.  115.)  He  was  at  this  time  M.P. 
180.)]  for  Salisbury.  (Wood,  F.  0.  i.  356.)] 


aught   I  know.     He  says,   '  that   in   all  things   concerning  Die 
which  the  Lord  Chamberlain's  warrant  went  in  this  form, —    ccimo- 


'  These  are  to  will  and  require  you,  &c.,'  that  there  his  Lp. 
did  it  without  consulting  the  King ;  and  that  the  warrants  for 
chaplains  run  all  in  this  form/  First,  this  is  more  than  I 
know  or  ever  heard  of  till  now.  Secondly,  be  it  so ;  yet  'tis 
hard  to  deny  the  King  to  hear  men  preach  before  they  be 
sworn  his  chaplains,  "if  his  Majesty  desire  it,  since  it  argues 
a  great  care  in  the  King,  especially  in  such  a  factious  time 
as  began  to  overlay  this  Church."  Thirdly,  he  confesses, 
'  that  he  knows  not  who  put  the  King  upon  this  way ;  but 
believes  that  I  did  it.'  He  is  single,  and  his  belief  only  is  no 
evidence.  "And  whosoever  gave  the  King  that  advice 
deserved  very  well  both  of  his  Majesty  and  the  Church  of 
England :  that  none  might  be  put  about  him  in  that  service 
but  such  as  himself  should  approve  of.  But  that  which 
troubled  this  witness  was  another  thing.  He  had  not  money 
for  every  one  that  was  made  chaplain;  nor  money  to  get 
them  a  month  to  wait  in ;  nor  money  to  change  their  month, 
if  it  were  inconvenient  for  their  other  occasions ;  nor  money 
for  sparing  their  attendance,  when  they  pleased.  In  which, 
and  other  things,  I  would  he  had  been  as  careful  of  his 
lord's  honour  as  I  have  been  in  all  things.  For  'tis  well 
known  in  court,  I  observed  his  Lp.  as  much  as  any  man." 

The  men  which  are  instanced  in,  are  Dr.  Heylin.  But  he 
368  was  preferred  to  that  service  by  my  Lord  the  E.  of  Daiibyx. 
Then  Dr.  Potter.  But  the  Ld.  Keeper  Coventry  was  his 
means.  Dr.  Cosens  was  preferred  by  Bishop  Neile,  whose 
chaplain  he  had  been  many  years,  and  he  moved  the  Ld. 
Chamberlain  for  it.  Dr.  Lawrence  *  was  my  Ld.  Chamber 
lain's  own  chaplain,  and  preferred  by  himself;  and  in  all 
likelihood,  by  Mr.  Oldsworth's  means  :  for  he  was  Fellow  of 
Magdalen  College,  in  Oxford,  as  Mr.  Oldsworth  himself  was, 
and  he  once  (to  my  knowledge)  had  a  great  opinion  of  him. 
Dr.  Hay  wood2,  indeed,  was  my  chaplain;  but  I  preferred 

1    [Heylin's  original  appointment  Professor  of  Divinity.      It  does  not 

as   King's   chaplain    is   preserved    in  appear  from   Wood's   account    (Ath. 

MS.  Bawl.  Miscell.  353.    (Wood,  Ath.  Ox.  iii.  437)  that  he  was  ever  Fellow 

Ox.  iii.  568.)]  of  Magdalen  College,  as  stated  below.] 

y    [Thomas    Lawrence,    Master    of  *  [See  above,  p.  210.] 
Balliol  College,  and  Lady  Margaret's 


Die  him  not  to  his  Majesty  till  he  had  preached  divers  times  in 

septimo.     cour^  with  great  approbation;  nor  then,  but  with  my  Ld. 

Chamberlain's  love  and  liking.      (203)  As  for  Dr.  Pockling- 

tona,  I  know  not  who  recommended  him ;  nor  is  there  any 

proof  offered  that  I  did  it. 

15.  Then  they  proceeded  to  my  own  chaplains.  They 
name  four  of  them  :  first,  Dr.  Weeks.  13  ut  he  was  never  in 
my  house,  never  meddled  with  the  licensing  of  any  books, 
till  he  was  gone  from  me  to  the  Bishop  of  London :  so  he  is 
charged  with  no  fault  so  long  as  he  was  mine.  The  second, 
Dr.  Hay  wood.  But  he  is  charged  with  nothing  but  Sales, 
which  was  a  most  desperate  plot  against  him,  as  is  before 
showedb.  The  third  was  Dr.  Martin c.  Against  him  came 
Mr.  Pryn,  for  his  Arminiaii  sermon  at  S.  Paul's  Cross.  But 
that's  answered  before.  And  Mr.  Walker  d,  who  said,  '  he 
proposed  Arminian  questions  to  divers  ministers.'  Belike, 
such  as  were  to  be  examined  by  him.  But  he  adds, '  as  these 
ministers  told  him.'  So  'tis  but  a  hearsay1.  And  say  he 
did  propose  such  questions ;  may  it  not  be  fit  enough  to  try 
how  able  they  were  to  answer  them  ?  The  fourth  was  Dr. 
Bray.  Against  him  Dr.  Featly  was  again  produced,  '  for  that 
which  he  had  expunged  out  of  his  sermons/  But  when  I  saw 
this  so  often  inculcated  to  make  a  noise,  I  humbly  desired  of 
the  Lords  that  I  might  ask  Dr.  Featly  one  question.  Upon 
leave  granted,  I  asked  him,  Whether  nothing  were  of  late 
expunged  out  of  a  book  of  his  written  against  a  priest6  ?  and 
desired  him  to  speak  upon  the  oath  he  had  taken.  He  an 
swered  roundly,  '  that  divers  passages  against  the  Anabap 
tists,  and  some  in  defence  of  the  Liturgy  of  the  Church  of 
England,  were  expunged.'  I  asked,  By  whom  ?  He  said, 
*  By  Mr.  Rouse  and  the  Committee/  or,  '  By  Mr.  Rouse  or 
the  Committee.'  Be  it  which  it  will,  I  observed  to  the  Lords, 
that  Mr.  Rouse  and  the  Committee  might  expunge  passages 
against  the  Anabaptists,  nay,  for  the  Liturgy  established  by 
law,  but  my  chaplains  may  not  expunge  anything  against  the 
Papists,  though  perhaps  mistaken. 

1  ['  But  he  adds,  .  .  .  hearsay.'  in  margin.] 

•  [See  above,  p.  266.]  e  [The  Look  referred  to  appears  to 

b  [See  above,  p.  286.]  be,  '  Koma  ruens,  or  an  Answer  to  a 

c  [Sec  above,  p.  200.]  Popish    Challenge,'   M'hich   was  pub- 

d  [See  above,  p.  293.]  lished  in  1644.] 


From  thence  they  fell  upon  men,  whom  they  said  I  had  Die 
preferred  to  benefices.  They  named  but  two.  Dr.  Heylin 
was  one  again,  whom  I  preferred  not.  The  other  was  Dr. 
Jackson,  the  late  President  of  Corpus  Christi  College,  in 
Oxford f.  Dr.  Featly  being  produced,  said,  ( Dr.  Jackson  was 
a  known  Arminian/  If  so  to  him,  'tis  well :  the  man  is 
dead,  and  cannot  answer  for  himself.  Thus  far  I  can  for  him, 
without  meddling  with  any  his  opinions.  He  was  very 
honest  and  very  learned  ;  and  at  those  years  he  was  of,  might 
deserve  more  than  a  poor  benefice. 

16.  Here  Mr.  Pryn  came  in  again,  and  testified  very 
boldly,  *  that  I  gave  many  benefices,  which  were  in  the  gift 
3C9  of  the  Master  of  the  Wards  :  and  all  preferments,  only  to 
such  men  as  were  for  ceremonies,  Popery,  and  Arminian- 
ism.'  For  the  first  of  these  two,  the  business  was  thus : 
there  arose  a  difference  between  the  then  Ld.  Keeper  Coven 
try  and  the  Ld.  Cottington,  then  Mr.  of  the  Wards,  about 
the  disposing  of  those  benefices.  It  grew  somewhat  high, 
and  came  to  hearing  by  the  King  himself.  His  Majesty, 
upon  hearing,  gave  the  right  of  sealing  to  the  Ld.  Keeper; 
but  for  the  time,  till  more  might  appear,  reserved  the  giving 
to  himself,  that  he  might  have  some  of  those  lesser  prefer 
ments  to  bestow  on  such  ministers  as  attended  upon  his  navy 
then  at  sea.  I  never  gave  any  one  of  these  benefices  in  my 
life.  And  that  this  story  is  of  truth,  the  Lord  Cottington  is 
yet  living,  and  can  witness  it.  "  And  this  very  answer  I  gave 
to  Mr.  Brown,  who  in  summing  up  the  charge  laid  this  also 
upon  me,  and  without  mentioning  what  answer  I  gave  to 
it1."  For  the  second,  '  that  I  preferred  none  but  such  men  ;' 
;Tis  known  I  preferred  Bishop  Hall  to  Exeter  £;  Dr.  Potter  to 
Carlisle11;  Dr.  Cook  to  Bristol1  first,  and  then  to  Hereford; 
that  I  gave  Dr.  Westfield  the  Archdeaconry  of  S.Alban'sk; 

1  ['And  this  very  .  .  .  it.'  on  opposite  page.] 

f  [Dr.  Thomas  Jackson  was,  in  ad-  Norwich,  Nov.  15, 1641.] 

dition  to  his  headship,  Prebendary  of  h  Dr.  Barnabas  Potter,  consecrated 

Winchester,    Vicar  of  Witney,    and  Bishop  of  Carlisle,  March  15,  1628.] 

Dean  of  Peterborough.     He  was  the  '  [George  Coke,  elected  Bishop  of 

well-known  author  of  the  Commenta-  Bristol,  Nov.  28,  1632,  translated  to 

ries  on  the  Creed,  &c.     (Wood,  Ath.  Hereford,  June  18,  1636.] 

Ox^ii.  664,  seq.)]  k  [Nov.  14,  1631.      Westfield  was 

K  [Dr.  Joseph  Hall,  elected  Bishop  in  1641  Bishop  of  Bristol.] 
of  Exeter,  Nov.  5,  1627,  translated  to 


that  I  was  Dr.  Fell's  means  for  Christ  Church1;  and  Dr. 
septimo,  Higgs  his  for  the  Deanery  of  Lichfield  m ;  that  I  settled  Dr. 
Downing  at  Hackney11;  and  Mr.  Herrick  at  Manchester0, 
when  the  Broad  Seal  formerly  given  him  was  questioned; 
that  I  gave  two  of  my  own  benefices  to  Mr.  Palmer?  and 
Mr.  Taylor q,  two  of  the  now  Synod;  an  hospital  to  Dr. 
Jackson  of  Canterbury1;  and  a  benefice  to  his  son-in-law, 
at  his  suit.  I  could  (204)  not  name  all  these  upon  the 
sudden,  yet  some  I  did;  and  no  one  of  them  guilty  of  this 
charge  in  the  least.  "  Mr.  Brown  in  his  summary  said 
'•  I  could  name  but  one  or  two.'  And  when  in  my  answer 
made  in  the  House  of  Commons  I  specified  more,  among 
which  Mr.  Palmer  was  one";  Mr.  Brown  said  in  his  reply, 
'  that  Mr.  Palmer  had  indeed  his  benefice  of  my  giving,  so 
himself  told  him1;  but  it  was  at  the  entreaty  of  a  great 
nobleman/  Say  it  were :  Mr.  Palmer  was  then  a  stranger 
to  me ;  somebody  must  speak,  and  assure  me  of  his  wants 
and  worth,  or  I  cannot  give.  But  if  upon  this  I  give  it 
freely,  is  it  worth  no  thanks  from  him,  because  a  nobleman 
spake  to  me?  Let  Mr.  Palmer  rank  this  gratitude  among 
his  other  virtues." 

17.  From  hence  they  stepped  over  into  Ireland,  and  ob 
jected  '  my  preferring  of  Dr.  Chappel  to  be  Mr.  of  the  College 
at  Dublin  V  Here  the  first  witness  is  Mr.  Walker.  He  says, 

1  ['  so  himself  told  him  ;'  in  margin.] 

1  [Appointed  Dean  of  Christ  Church,  afterwards  Fellow  of  All  Souls,  and 

June  24, 1638.]  Warden  of  Manchester.   Subsequently 

m  [Griffin  Higgs  had  been  chaplain  he  sided  with  the  Presbyterians,  was  one 

to   the   Queen   of  Bohemia;    on   his  of  the  Assembly  of  Divines,  implicated 

return  to  England  he  was  appointed,  in  Love's  plot,  and  assistant  to   the 

by   Laud's   interest,   Hector  of  Cliff,  Commissioners  in  Lancashire  for  the 

near  Dover,  Precentor  of  S.  David's,  ejection     of      scandalous     ministers, 

and  in  1638  Dean  of  Lichfield.  (Wood,  (Wood,  Ath.  Ox.  iii.  78.)] 

Ath.  Ox.  iii.  479—481.)]  P    [Herbert    Palmer,    of  Ash  well. 

n   [Calibute   Downing  appears   to  Pie  was  afterwards  Master  of  Queen's 

have  obtained  Hackney  in  exchange  College,  Cambridge,  in  the  room  of 

for  West  lisle y,  Berks.    Early  in  the  Dr.  Martin.] 

Rebellion  he  advocated  the  doctrine  i  [Francis  Taylor,  of  Yeldon.] 

of  resistance  ;  and  at  last,  for  his  sedi-  r  [See  above,  p.  223.] 

tious  preaching,  earned  the  title  of  s    [William    Chappell,   of   Christ's 

'Hugh   Peters  the  Second.'    (Wood,  College,  Cambridge.    In  1633  he  was 

Ath.  Ox.  iii.  106,  107.)]  promoted  to  the  Deanery  of  Cashel,  in 

0  [Richard  Heyrick,  (son  of  Sir  W.  1634    to  the  Provostship  of  Trinity 

Hey  rick,  a  friend  and  correspondent  College,  Dublin,  and  in  1638  to  t\i& 

of  Archbishop  Laud,  see  Letters,  vol.  Bishopric   of  Cork.     Articles  of  im- 

vi.)  of  S.  John's  College,  Oxford,  and  peachment    were    exhibited    against 


that  all  his  scholars  were  Arminians/     This  is  a  great  sign,  Di< 



but   not   full   proof.     He  says,   'that  Dr.  Chappel  was    at  Decimo 

first  fierce  against  them,  but  afterward  changed  his  mind/ 
Dr.  Featly  said  the  like  of  Dr.  Potter.  Some  say,  Arminius 
himself  was  at  first  zealous  against  those  opinions,  but  study 
ing  hard  to  confute  them,  changed  his  own  mind.  ft  Take 
heed,  Mr.  Walker,  do  not  study  these  points  too  hard."  For 
my  own  part,  Dr.  Chappel  was  a  Cambridge  man,  altogether 
unknown  to  me  save  that  I  received  from  thence  great  testi 
mony  of  his  abilities,  and  fitness  for  government,  which  that 
college  then  extremely  wanted  l  i .  And  no  man  ever  com 
plained  to  me,  that  he  favoured  Armmianism. 

The  other  witness  was  Dr.  Hoyle,  a  Fellow  of  the  College 
in  Dublin11.  He  says,  fthat  the  Doctor  did  maintain  in 
that  college,  justification  by  works;  and  in  Christ  Church, 
370  Arminianism.'  In  this  he  is  single.  But  if  it  be  true,  why 
did  not  the  Ld.  Primate  of  Armagh  punish  him  ?  for  he  says 
he  knew  it.  '  That  he  opposed  some  things  in  the  Synod/ 
And  it  may  be  there  was  just  cause  for  it.  Lastly,  he  says, 
'  the  late  Ld.  Deputy  liked  not  the  Irish  Articles ;  but  gave 
them  an  honourable  burial,  as/  he  says,  '  the  Ld.  Primate 
himself  confessed  V  I  am  a  stranger  to  all  this  ;  nor  doth 
Dr.  Hoyle  charge  anything  against  me  ;  but  says,  '  that  they 
which  did  this,  were  supposed  to  have  some  friend  in  Eng 
land/  And  surely  their  carriage  was  very  ill,  if  they  had 

18.  Then  '  were  letters  read  of  my  Lord  Primate's  to  me, 
in  which  is  testified  my  care  of  the  patrimony  of  that 
Church.  And  then  a  paper  of  instructions  given  by  me  to 
the  Lord  Deputy  at  his  first  going  into  that  kingdom/  For 

1  ['  which  that .  .  .  wanted/  in  margin.] 

him  in  1641 ;  but  at  length  he  was  factious  person.  On  the  breaking  out 
permitted  to  visit  England,  where,  of  the  Irish  Rebellion,  he  retired  to 
after  enduring  a  series  of  misfortunes,  England,  and  became  Vicar  of  Step- 
he  died  Whitsunday  (May  13),  1649.  ney.  He  was  appointed  one  of  the 
(Biogr.  Brit.)]  Assembly  of  Divines,  Master  of  Uni- 

1  [He  was  made  Provost  of  Trinity  versity  College,  and  Regius  Professor 

College,  Dublin,  on  the  retirement  of  of  Divinity  at  Oxford.    (Wood,  Ath. 

Dr.   Robert   Ussher,   whom    Primate  Ox.  iii.  382,  383.)] 

Ussher  admitted  to  be  incapable.]  *  [On  the  adoption  of  the  English 

u  [Joshua  Hoyle,  originally  of  Mag-  Articles  by  the  Irish  Convocation  in 

dalen  Hall,  Oxford ;  Fellow  of  Trinity  1634,  see  Elrington's  Life  of  Ussher, 

College,  Dublin,  where  he  proved  a  pp.  173,  seq.] 


Die  the  first;  though  it  be  thrust  in  here,  among  matters  of 

scptimo.  religion,  yet  I  pray  your  Lps.  to  consider,  'tis  about  the 
patrimony  of  that  Church  only.  And  I  thank  them  heartily 
for  producing  it.  For  in  this  letter  is  a  full  confession  of 
my  Ld.  Primate's,  that  the  motion  of  getting  the  impropria- 
tions  from  his  Majesty  (formerly  objected  against  me)  pro 
ceeded  from  him,  as  I  then  pleaded.  And  the  letter  was 
read  y.  For  the  second ;  my  Ld.  Deputy,  a  little  before  his 
first  going  into  Ireland,  asked  me  what  service  I  would  com 
mand  him  for  the  Church  there  ?  I  humbly  thanked  him, 
as  I  had  reason,  and  told  him  I  would  bethink  myself,  and 
give  him  my  thoughts  in  writing z.  These  are  they  which 
are  called  (  Instructions.'  They  are  only  for  the  good  of  that 
poor  Church,  as  your  Lps.  have  heard  them.  This  was  all ; 
and  herein  my  lord  showed  his  honour,  and  I  did  but  my 
duty.  "  Though  I  very  well  understand,  why  this  paper  is 
produced  against  me." 

After  this  they  proceeded  to  the  eleventh  Original  Article, 
which  follows  in  h&c  verba  : — 

11.  He  in  his  own  person,  and  his  suffragans,  visitors,  surro 
gates,  chancellors,  or  other  officers  by  his  command,  have 
caused  divers  learned,  pious,  and  orthodox  preachers  of. 
God's  Word  to  be  silenced,  suspended,  deprived,  degraded, 
excommunicated,  or  otherwise  grieved  and  vexed,  without 
any  just  and  lawful  cause ;  whereby,  (205)  and  by  divers 
other  means,  he  hath  hindered  the  preaching  of  God's 
Word,  caused  divers  of  his  Majesty's  loyal  subjects  to 
forsake  the  kingdom,  and  increased  and  cherished  igno 
rance  and  profaneness  among  the  people,  that  so  he 
might  the  better  facilitate  the  way  to  the  effecting  of  his 
own  wicked  and  traitorous  design  of  altering  and  corrupt 
ing  the  true  religion  here  established. 

1.    The  first  instance  to  make  good  this  Article,  was  a 
repetition  of  some  lecturers  before  named a.     But  when  they 

y  [This,  probably,  is  Abp.  Ussher's  following  year.] 

letter,  which  is  numbered  clxxii.  in  *  [See  Abp.  Laud's  letter  to  Straf- 

Parr's  Collection.    It  is  by  him  placed  ford,  April  30,  1633.] 

in   1632,    but    is  by   Dr.  Elrington  »  [See  above,  pp.  232,  seq.] 
transferred  to  its  proper  place  in  the 


thought   they  had  made   noise   enough,    they  referred   the 
Lords  to  their  notes  ;  and  so  did  I  to  my  former  answers.        septimo. 

2.  The  second  instance  was  out  of  some  Articles  of  Bp. 
Mountague  and  Bp.  Wrenn,  and  their  account  given  to  me. 
Bishop  Wrenn,  Art.  16,   speaks  of  the  '  afternoon  sermons 
being  turned  into  catechising/     And  Art.  5,  (of  his  Account, 

371  I  take  it,)  'that  no  lecture  in  his  diocese  after V  &c.  It  was 
made  plain  to  the  Lords,  that  this  was  spoken  of  some  single 
and  factious  lecturers,  and  that  they  had  their  lectures  read 
by  a  company  of  learned  and  orthodox  ministers  by  turns. 
As  appeared  by  the  Monday  sermon  at  Burye,  during  that 
learned  Bp/s  time  c.  Nor  were  any  forbid  to  preach  in  the 
afternoon,  so  the  catechising  were  not  omitted,  before  it,  or 
with  it.  And  the  Bishop  is  living  to  answer  it,  if  aught  were 
then  done  amiss  by  him.  In  all  which  he  did  nothing,  as 
any  deputy  or  surrogate  of  mine,  but  as  diocesan  of  the  place. 
As  for  the  yearly  account  to  the  King,  according  to  his 
royal  instructions  in  that  behalf  d;  though  it  AY  ere  pressed 
here  again  to  multiply  noise,  yet  nothing  being  new,  I  gave 
my  answer  as  before,  and  to  that  I  refer  myself. 

3.  The  third  answer  was  concerning  Mr.  Lee  of  Wolver- 
hampton e.      The   evidence   was   a   letter   of  my   secretary, 
Mr.  Dell,  written  by  my  command,  to  my  visitors  there,  to 
this  effect,  '  That  whether  there  were  cause  or  no,  they  should 
either  punish  Mr.  Lee,  or  bring  him  into  the  High- Commis 
sion.'     Had  the  words  or  the  sense  been  thus,  they  might 
well  say,  '  It  was  hard  for  the  judge  before  whom  the  party 
was  to  answer,  to  write  thus/    But  I  called  to  have  the  letter 
read  again,  and  the  words  were  these,  '  If  there  were  found 
against  him  that  which  might  justly  be  censured,  then  they 
should  punish/  &c.     And  the  reason  why  this  strict  care 
was  taken,  was  because  the  Dean  of  Windsor  f  his  ordinary 
complained  unto  me,  that  Mr.  Lee's  carriage  was  so  factious 

b  [See  the  account  of  Bp.  Wren,  brother  of  Matthew  Wren,  Bp.  of  Ely, 

•which   appears  to  be  referred  to,  in  and  father  of  Sir  Christopher  Wren) 

Prynne's  Cant.  Doom,  pp.  374 — 376.]  was  at  this  time  Dean,  having  been 

c  [See  ibid.  p.  375.]  installed   April  4,  1635.     The  com- 

d  [See  vol.  v.  p.  311.]  plaint  had  probably  been  made  by  his 

e  [This  case  is  enlarged  upon  in  brother,  whom  he  succeeded  in  this 

Prynne's  Cant.  Doom,  pp.  380,381,  office.    The  Deaneries  of  Windsor  and 

who    gives   Dell's    letter    mentioned  Wolverhampton  were  united  by  King 

below.]  Edward  IV.] 

{  [Christopher  Wren  (the  younger 


Die  there,  that  he  could  contain  him  in  no  order.     If  he  e  were  a 

man  after  this  approved  at  Shrewsbury/  (as  Mr.  "Walker 
witnesses,)  I  hope  the  proceedings  at  Wolverhampton  did 
him  good1.  But,  my  Lords,  had  it  so  fallen  out,  that  my 
secretary  had  forgotten  my  instructions,  and  himself  too,  and 
expressed  himself  amiss,  shall  that  slip  of  his  (had  it  been 
such)  be  imputed  to  me  ?  I  believe  your  Lps.  would  not 
willingly  answer  for  every  phrase  of  your  secretaries'  letters, 
which  yet  you  command  them  to  write. 

4.  The  last  instance,  '  was  the  sentence  in  the  High-Com 
mission  against  Mr.  Barnard,  for  words  about  Pelagian 
errors  and  Popery  ^/  First,  if  he  were  sentenced  in  the 
High-Commission,  it  was  the  act  of  the  Court,  and  not  mine; 
as  has  been  often  said.  Secondly,  no  proof  is  offered  that  he 
was  sentenced  for  those  words  only.  Thirdly,  the  Recanta 
tion  (howsoever  refused  by  him,  as  Mr.  Pryn  says  it  was) 
makes  mention  of  four  points  for  which  he  was  censured,  of 
which  these  words  are  one.  But  not  the  words  themselves, 
but  his  unjust  and  scandalous  application  of  them  to  me, 
which  deserved  them  not.  And  lastly,  Dr.  Cumber,  Master 
of  Trinity  College  in  Cambridge11,  was  prosecutor  against 
him ;  which  office  so  grave  and  worthy  a  man  would  not 
(I  suppose)  have  undertaken,  had  there  not  been  great  and 
just  cause  for  it. 

Hence  they  proceeded  to  the  sixth  Additional  Article, 
which  follows  in  these  words  : — 

That  whereas  divers  gifts  and  dispositions  of  divers  sums  of 
money  were  heretofore  made  by  divers  charitable  and  well- 
disposed  (206)  persons,  for  the  buying  in  of  divers  impro- 
priations,  for  the  maintenance  of  preaching  the  Word  of 
God  in  several  churches ;  the  said  Archbp.,  about  eight  372 
years  last  past,  ivilfully  and  maliciously  caused  the  said 

1   ['  If  he  were  .  .  .  good.'  in  margin.] 

R  [Nathaniel  Barnard,  Lecturer  of  his  Sermon,  as  also  his  Recantation," 

S.  Sepulchre's,  London,  who  had  been  are  given  in  Prynne's  Cant.  Doom, 

previously   convented    in    the   High  pp.  364 — 367.] 

Commission  Court,  and  had  made  his  h  [Thomas  Comber,  admitted  Oct. 

submission,  was  again  convented  for  12,    1631.     He   had   been   appointed 

a    Sermon   preached   by    him   at  S.  Dean   of   Carlisle    in   1626.      Lloyd 

Mary's   Church,   Cambridge,   May  6,  (Memoirs,  p.   447)   speaks  highly  of 

1632.     The  objectionable  passages  of  his  learning  and  attainments.] 


gifts,  feoffments,  and  conveyances,  made  to  the  uses  Die 
aforesaid,  to  be  overthrown  in  his  Majesty's  Court  o/ 
Exchequer,  contrary  to  law,  as  things  dangerous  to  the 
Church  and  State,  under  the  specious  pretence  of  buying 
in  appropriations;  whereby  that  pious  work  was  sup 
pressed  and  trodden  down,  to  the  great  dishonour  of  God, 
and  scandal  of  religion. 

This  Article  is  only  about  the  feoffments.  That  which 
I  did  was  this.  I  was  (as  then  advised  upon  such  informa 
tion  as  was  given  me)  clearly  of  opinion,  that  this  was  a 
cunning  way,  under  a  glorious  pretence,  to  overthrow  the 
Church  Government,  by  getting  into  their  power  more  de 
pendency  of  the  clergy,  than  the  King,  and  all  the  Peers,  and 
all  the  Bishops  in  all  the  kingdom  had.  And  I  did  conceive 
the  plot  the  more  dangerous  for  the  fairness  of  the  pretence ; 
and  that  to  the  State,  as  well  as  the  Church.  Hereupon,  not 
'  maliciously/  (as  'tis  charged  in  the  Article,)  but  conscien 
tiously  I  resolved  to  suppress  it,  if  by  law  it  might  be  done. 
Upon  this,  I  acquainted  his  Majesty  with  the  thing,  and  the 
danger  which  I  conceived  would  in  few  years  spring  out  of 
it.  The  King  referred  me  to  his  Attorney  and  the  law. 
Mr.  Attorney  Noye,  after  some  pause  upon  it,  proceeded  in 
the  Exchequer,  and  there  it  was  by  judicial  proceeding  and 
sentence  overthrown.  If  this  sentence  were  according  to 
law  and  justice ;  then  there 's  no  fault  at  all  committed.  If 
it  were  against  law,  the  fault,  whatever  it  be,  was  the  judges', 
not  mine ;  for  I  solicited  none  of  them.  And  here  I  humbly 
desired,  that  the  Lords  would  at  their  leisure  read  over  the 
sentence  given  in  the  Exchequer {,  which  I  then  delivered  in; 
but  by  reason  of  the  length  it  was  not  then  read.  Whether 
after  it  were,  I  cannot  tell.  I  desired  likewise,  that  my 
Counsel  might  be  heard  in  this,  and  all  other  points  of  law. 

1.  The  first  witness  was  Mr.  Kendall k.     He   says,  that 
speaking  with  me  about  Presteeii,  '  I  thanked  God  that  I  had 
overthrown  this  feoffment.' 

2.  The  second  witness,  Mr.  Miller l,  says,  he  heard  me  say, 

5   Sir  Leolin  Jenkins  hath  a  copy  of  k   ['  William   Kendall.'  —  Prynne's 

it  out  of  the  Records  of  the  Exchequer.  Cant.  Doom,  p.  388.] 

— W.  S.  A.  C.     [See  Rushwortk's  Col-  »  [' Tempest  Miller.'— Ibid.] 
lections,  vol.  ii.  pp.  151,  152.] 


Die  *  They  would  have  undone  the  Church,  but  I  have  overthrown 

scpUmo"  ^icir  feoffment.'  These  two  witnesses  prove  no  more  than 
I  confess.  For  in  the  manner  aforesaid,  I  deny  not  but 
I  did  my  best  in  a  legal  way  to  overthrow  it.  And  if  I  did 
thank  God  for  it,  it  was  my  duty  to  do  so,  the  thing  being  in 
my  judgment  so  pernicious  as  it  was. 

3.  The  third  witness  was  Mr.  "White,  one  of  the  feoffees  m. 
He  says,  ( that  coming  as  counsel  in  a  cause  before  me ; 
when  that  business  was  done,  I  fell  bitterly  on  him  as  au 
undermirier  of  the  Church/  I  remember  well  his  coming  to 
me  as  counsel  about  a  benefice.  And  'tis  very  likely  I  spake 
my  conscience  to  him,  as  freely  as  he  did  his  to  me  ;  but  the 
particulars  I  remember  not ;  nor  do  I  remember  his  coming 
afterwards  to  me  to  Fulham  ;  nor  his  offer  '  to  change  the 
men  or  the  course,  so  the  thing  might  stand/  For  to  this 
I  should  have  been  as  willing  as  he  was ;  and  if  I  remember 
right,  there  was  order  taken  for  this  in  the  decree  of  the 
Exchequer.  And  his  Majesty's  pleasure  declared,  that  no  373 
penny  so  given  should  be  turned  to  other  use.  And  I  have 
been,  and  shall  ever  be  as  ready  to  get  in  impropriatiqns,  by 
any  good  and  legal  way,  as  any  man  (as  may  appear  by  my 
labours  about  the  impropriations  in  Ireland).  But  this  way 
did  not  stand  either  with  my  judgment  or  conscience. 

1.  First,  because  little  or  nothing  was  given  by  them  to 
the  pre (207) sent  incumbent,  to  whom  the  tithes  were  due,  if 
to  any ;  that  the  parishioners  which  payed  them,  might  have 
the  more  cheerful  instruction,  the  better  hospitality,  and 
more  full  relief  for  their  poor. 

"  2.  Secondly,  because  most  of  the  men  they  put  in,  were 
persons  disaffected  to  the  discipline,  if  not  the  doctrine  too,  of 
the  Church  of  England. 

"  3.  Thirdly,  because  no  small  part  was  given  to  school 
masters,  to  season  youth  ab  ovo,  for  their  party;  and  to 
young  students  in  the  universities,  to  purchase  them  and 
their  judgments  to  their  side,  against  their  coming  abroad 
into  the  Church. 

"4.  Fourthly,  because  all  this  power  to  breed  and  maintain 
a  faction,  was  in  the  hands  of  twelve  men,  who  were  they 
never  so  honest,  and  free  from  thoughts  of  abusing  this  power, 
ni  [See  above,  p.  132,  note?.] 


to  fill  the  Church  with  schism,  yet  who  should  be  successors,  Die 
mid  what  use   should  be  made  of  this  power,   was  out  of 
human  reach  to  know." 

5.  Because  this  power  was  assumed  by,  and  to  themselves, 
without  any  legal  authority,  as  Mr.  Attorney  assured  me. 

He  further  said,  'that  the  impropriation  of  Presteen  in 
Radnorshire,  was  specially  given  to  St.  AntolinV  in  London11.' 
I  say  the  more  the  pity,  considering  the  poorness  of  that 
country,  and  the  little  preaching  that  was  among  that  poor 
people,  and  the  plenty  which  is  in  London.  Yet  because  it 
was  so  given,  there  was  care  taken  after  the  decree,  that  they 
of  St.  Antolin's1  had  consideration,  and  I  think  to  the  full, 
He  says,  'that  indeed  they  did  not  give  anything  to  the 
present  incumbents,  till  good  men  came  to  be  in  their  places.' 
Scarce  one  incumbent  was  bettered  by  them.  And  what 
then  ?  In  so  many  places  not  one  fgood  man'  found?  "Not 
one  factious  enough  against  the  Church,  for  Mr.  White  to 
account  him  good?"  Yet  he  thinks  'I  disposed  these 
things  afterwards  to  unworthy  men/  "Truly,  had  they  been 
at  my  disposal,  I  should  not  wittingly  have  given  them  to 
Mr.  White's  worthies."  But  his  Majesty  laid  his  command 
upon  his  Attorney,  and  nothing  was  done  or  to  be  done  in 
these  things,  but  by  his  direction.  For  Dr.  Heylin,  if  he 
spake  anything  amiss  concerning  this  feoffment,  in  any  ser 
mon  of  his  °,  he  is  living  to  answer  it ;  me  it  concerns  not. 
"Mr.  Brown  in  the  sum  of  the  charge  omitted  not  this. 
And  I  answered  as  before.  And  in  his  reply  he  turned 
again  upon  it,  that  it  must  be  a  crime  in  me,  because  I  pro 
jected  to  overthrow  it.  But,  under  favour,  this  follows  not. 
For  to  project,  (though  the  word  ' projector'  sound  ill  in  Eng 
land,)  is  no  more  than  to  forecast  and  forelay  any  business. 

1  ['  St.  Antolin's  '  written  in  both  places  '  S.  Antns.'] 

n  [This  impropriation  was,  after  its  at  S.  Mary's,  Oxford,  July  11,  1630,  at 

forfeiture,  granted  by  King  Charles  I.  the  Act.  The  passage  relating  to  the 

to  the  Rector  of  Presteign  for  ever.  feoffees  will  be  found  in  Prynne, 

This  grant  was  revoked  during  the  (Cant.  Doom,  p.  386,)  who  transcribed' 

Rebellion,  but  confirmed  by  King  it  from  a  MS.  copy  of  the  Sermon  in 

Charles  If.  at  the  beginning  of  his  Abp.  Laud's  study;  and  in  Heylin, 

reign.]  (Cypr.  Ang.  p.  199,  Lond.  1671,)  who 

0  [The  Sermon  to  which  reference  appears  in  his  turn  to  have  transcribed 

is  here  made,  was  preached  by  Heylin  it  from  Prynne.] 

LAUD. — VOL.  iv. 


Die  Now  as  His  lawful  for  me,  by  all  good  and  fit  means,  to 

sepUmo  project  the  settlement  of  anything  that  is  good ;  so  is  it  as 
lawful  by  good  and  legal  means,  to  project  the  overthrow  of 
anything  that  is  cunningly  or  apparently  evil.  And  such  did 
this  feoffment  appear  to  my  understanding,  and  doth  still."  374 
As  for  reducing  of  impropriations  to  their  proper  use,  they 
may  see  (if  they  please)  in  my  Diary  (whence  they  had  this) 
another  project  to  buy  them  into  the  Church's  use  P.  For 
given  they  will  not  be.  But  Mr.  Pryn  would  show  nothing, 
nor  Mr.  Nicolas  see  anything,  but  what  they  thought  would 
make  against  me. 

Here  this  day  ended q,  and  I  was  commanded  to  attend 
Julii  15.     again,  July  15.     But  was  then  put  off  to  July  17,  which  day 

p  [See  vol.  iii.  p.  255.]  Dr.  Martin,  who  were  in  prison  by 

q  [It  appears,  by  the  Lords'  Jour-  order  of  the   House,   might  be  wit- 

nals,    that    the    Archbishop   desired  nesses  for  him,  and  that  the  request 

this    day,    that    Dr.   Haywood    and  was  granted.] 


CAP.  XL. 


THIS   day   they   charged   upon   me  the   twelfth   Original  Julii  17, 
Article,  which  follows  in  these  words: —  Wednes 


He  hath   traitorously   endeavoured  to    cause  division  and^>'lQ. 
discord  between  the   Church  of  England  and  other  Re-  octavo. 
formed  (208)  Churches ;  and,  to  that  end,  hath  suppressed 
and  abrogated  the  privileges  and  immunities  ivhich  have 
been  by  his  Majesty  and  his  royal  ancestors  granted  to 
the  French  and  Dutch  Churches  in  this  kingdom;  and 
divers  other  ways  hath  expressed  his  malice  and  disaffec 
tion  to  those  Churches ;  that  so,  by  such  disunion,  the 
Pa2rists  might  have  more  advantage  for  the  overthrow  and 
extirpation  of  both. 

The  first  charge  is,  '  that  I  deny  them  to  be  a  Church  :'  for  I. 
they  say,  '  that  I  say  plainly  in  my  book  against  Fisher,  that 
No  Bishop,  no  Church3.  Now  'tis  well  known  they  have  no 
Bps.,  and  therefore  no  Church/  The  passage  in  my  book 
is  an  inference  of  St.  Jerome's  opinion,  no  declaration  of  my 
own.  And  if  they  or  any  other  be  aggrieved  at  St.  Jerome 
for  writing  so,  they  may  answer  him.  Mr.  Nicolas  added, 
( that  this  was  seconded  by  Bp.  Mountague's  bookb,  which 
Mr.  Pryn'  (carefully)  'witnessed  was  found  in  my  study,  and 
licensed  by  Dr.  Braye/  Is  this  argument  come  again,  that 

a  Cont.  Fisher,  §  25,  p.  176.  [p.  194,  per  xflP°G€fffav  Episcopalem  ordina- 

note  u,  ad  fin.  Oxf.  1849.]  riain.  .  .  Nam  quod  praetendunt  ordi- 

b  ["  Hoc  ipsum  officium  et  munus  nariam  vocationem  retinendam,  adhi- 

in  Ecclesia,  sive  Apostolicum,  seu  sa-  bendam,  eique  adhserescendum,  nisi 

cerdotale,  adeo  esse  de  necessitate  in  casu  necessitatis,  absurdum  est.  .  . 

salutis  ordinaria,  ut  sine  altero  alte-  Neque  enim  tails  casus  aut  exlitit 

rum  esse  nequeat.  Non  est  sacerdo-  aliquando,  aut  contingere  potest."— 

tium  nisi  in  Ecclesia,  non  est  Ecclesia  Rich.]  Mounta.  Origi.  Eccles.  p.  464. 

sine  sacerdotio.  lllud  autein  intelligo  [Lond.  1640.] 

x  2 


Die  Bp.  Mountague's  book  was  found  in  my  study  ?     et  Leave  it, 

octavo.  for  shame."  But  they  have  now  left  me  never  a  book  in  my 
study;  so  I  cannot  make  them  any  fuller  answer,  without 
viewing  the  place,  than  themselves  help  me  to  by  their  own 
confession.  Which  is,  that  he  adds  this  exception,  that  none 
but  a  Bishop  can  ordain,  but  in  casu  necessitatis,  which  is  the 
opinion  of  many  learned  and  moderate  divines.  "  Yet  this  is 
very  considerable  in  the  business,  whether  an  inevitable 
necessity  be  cast  upon  them,  or  they  pluck  a  kind  of  neces 
sity  upon  themselves." 

II.  The  second  charge  is  out  of  a  letter  of  mine  to  Bishop 
Hall,  upon  a  letter  which  he  had  formerly  sent  me;  in  which, 
it  seems,  '  is  something  about  the  case  of  necessity  in  point  of 
ordination,  which,'  they  say,  (  I  disliked/  And  it  seems 
I  disliked  upon  good  ground.  For  he  had  given  me  power  375 
under  his  hand  to  alter  what  I  would  in  that  which  he  sent 
unto  me.  I  would  not  take  that  power,  but  writ  back  to  him 
what  passages  I  thought  might  be  better  expressed,  if  it 
could  agree  with  his  judgment  also.  Hereupon  he  sent  me 
another  letter,  of  Jan.  18,  1639C,  in  which  he  altered  those 
things  which  I  put  to  his  further  consideration.  Could  any 
thing  be  more  fairly  carried  ?  And  this  letter  was  read  to 
the  Lords.  Yea,  but  they  say,  '  I  disliked  the  giving  of  this 
title  Antichrist  to  the  Pope/  No,  I  did  not  simply  dislike  it, 
but  I  advised  Bp.  Hall,  if  he  thought  it  good,  not  to  affirm 
it  so  positively d.  And  the  reason  I  gave  was  this  :  that 
King  James  being  pressed  upon  a  great  occasion  that  he  had 
maintained  '  that  the  Pope  was  Antichrist/  which  might 
much  trouble,  if  not  quite  cross,  some  proceedings  much 
desired  by  that  prudent  king;  his  Majesty  made  answer: 
'  I  maintain  it  not  as  a  point  of  faith,  but  as  a  probable 
opinion ;  and  for  which  I  have  more  grounds  than  the  Pope 
hath  for  his  challenge  of  temporal  power  over  princes.  Let 
him  recall  this  opinion,  and  I'll  recall  that0/  This  I  writ  to 
the  Bp.,  but  left  him  free  to  do  what  he  pleased. 

Here  Mr.  Nicolas  fell  extreme  foul  upon  me,  insomuch 

c  [This  letter  is  preserved  in  Spanish  match  was  in  contemplation. 

Prynne's  Cant.  Doom,  p.  275.]  But  he  had  already  used  the  same 

d  [See  Abp.  Laud's  letter  to  Bp.  argumentum  ad  liominem  in  his  con- 
Hall,  Jan.  14,  1639.]  troversy  with  Cardinal  Bellarmine. 

c  [The  Archbishop  mentions  that  See  the  '  Praefatio  Monitoria,'  pp.  142, 

the  King  made  this  reply  when  the  143.  Loud.  1610.] 


that  I  could  not  but  wonder  at  their  patience  which  heard  Die 
him.  Among  other  titles  bestowed  on  me,  many  and  gross, 
he  called  me  over  and  over  again,  '  pander  to  the  whore 
of  Babylon/  I  was  much  moved;  and  humbly  desired 
the  Lords,  that  if  my  crimes  were  such  as  that  I  might  not 
be  used  like  an  Archbishop,  yet  I  might  be  used  like  a 
Christian :  and  that,  were  it  not  for  the  duty  which  I  owe  to 
God  and  my  innocency,  I  would  desert  my  defence,  before 
I  would  endure  such  language  in  such  an  honourable  pre 
sence.  Hereupon  some  Lords  showed  their  dislike,  (209) 
and  wished  him  to  leave,  and  pursue  the  evidence. 

"  Mr.  Brown,  in  summing  up  the  charge,  made  this  a  great 
matter,  '  the  denial  of  the  Pope  to  be  Antichrist/  But  I  did 
not  deny  it,  nor  declare  any  opinion  of  my  own :  and  many 
Protestants,  and  those  very  learned,  are  of  opinion  that  he  is 
not.  'Tis  true  I  did  not,  I  cannot,  approve  foul  language  in 
controversies.  Nor  do  I  think  that  the  calling  of  the  Pope 
'  Antichrist/  did  ever  yet  convert  an  understanding  Papist. 
And  sure  I  am,  Gabriel  Powells  peremptoriness  (to  say  no 
worse)  in  this  point,  did  the  Church  of  England  no  good,  no 
honour  in  foreign  parts  :  for  there  he  affirms,  '  that  he  is  as 
certain  that  the  Pope  is  Antichrist,  as  that  Jesus  Christ  is  the 
Son  of  God  and  Redeemer  of  the  world  V  As  for  the  thing 
itself,  I  left  it  free  to  all  men  to  think  as  their  judgment 
guided  them :  as  appears  by  the  licensing  of  Dr.  Featly's 
Sermons,  where  he  proves  the  Pope,  in  his  opinion,  to  be  Anti 
christs.  Where  he  calls  him  also  the  c  Whore  of  Babylon11/ 
which  surely  I  should  never  have  suffered  to  be  printed,  had 
I  been  her  '  pander/  And  for  Bp.  Hall,  I  only  told  him 
what  King  James  had  said,  and  left  him  to  make  what  use 
he  pleased  of  it." 

The  third  charge  was  out  of  a  paper,  which  Bp.  Hall,  about   III 

the  time  when  he  wrote  his  book  in  defence  of  Episcopacy, 

sent    unto   me,    containing   divers    propositions    concerning 

episcopal  government ;  in  which  either  he  or  I,  or  both  say, 

376  (for   that    circumstance    I    remember    not,)    '  that    Church 

f  "Tarn  certo  scio  Papam  esse  mag-  Epist.  ad  Lectorem.     [Lond.  1605.] 

num  ilium  Antichristum,  quam  Doum  s  Dr.  Featly's  [Claris  Mystica,]  Ser- 

ipsum  esse  in  ccelis  Creatorcm,et  Je-  mon  [lx.]  p.  808.    [Lond.  1636,] 

Mini  Christum  vcruni  Messiam."— Gab.  ''  P.  810. 
Pow.  [Disput,  Thcol.]  do  Antichristo. 



government  by  Bishops  is  not  alterable  by  human  law1/     To 


octavo.       this  I  answered,  that  Bishops  might  be  regulated  and  limited 

1  [The  following  are  the  Proposi 
tions,  as  given  by  Prynne,  (Cant. 
Doom,  pp.  237,  238.)  The  passages 
in  italics,  as  also  the  headings,  were 
(according  to  Prynne)  additions  or 
corrections  of  the  Archbishop. 

"  Concerning  Church-government, 
and  the  estate  of  Episcopacy  : — 

"  1.  God  had  never  any  Church 
upon  earth  that  was  ruled  by  a  pai-ity. 

"  2.  The  first  Church  of  God,  which 
was  reduced  to  a  public  policy,  was 
among  the  Jews,  and,  by  His  own  ap 
pointment,  was  governed  by  a  settled 
imparity  of  High  Priest,  Priests,  Le- 

"3.  The  Evangelical  Church  was 
founded  by  our  Saviour  in  a  known 
imparity;  for  though  the  Apostles 
were  equal  among  themselves,  yet 
they  were  above  the  Seventy  and  all 
other  disciples,  and  were  specially  in 
dued  with  power  from  on  high. 

"  4.  The  same  God  and  Saviour,  after 
his  ascension,  did  set  several  ranks 
and  orders  of  the  holy  Ministry  :  first, 
Apostles;  secondly, Prophets;  thirdly, 
Teachers,  &c. ;  all  which  acknow 
ledged  the  eminence  and  authority  of 
the  Apostles. 

"  5.  The  Apostles,  after  the  ascen 
sion  of  our  Saviour,  by  the  direction 
of  God's  Spirit,  did  exercise  that 
power  and  superiority  of  spiritual  ju 
risdiction  over  the  rest  of  the  Church, 
which  was  given  them  by  Christ,  and 
stood  upon  their  majority  above  all 
other  ministers  of  the  gospel. 

"  6.  The  same  Apostles  did  not 
carry  that  power  up  to  heaven  with 
them,  and  leave  the  Church  unfur- 
nic'hed  with  the  due  helps  of  her  fur 
ther  propagation  and  government ; 
but,  by  virtue  of  this  power,  and  by 
the  same  direction  of  God's  Spirit, 
ordained  in  several  parts  spiritual 
guides  and  governors  of  God's  people, 
to  aid  and  succeed  them. 

"  7.  The  spiritual  persons  so  by 
them  ordained  were  at  the  first  pro 
miscuously  called  Bishops  and  Pres 
byters,  and  managed  the  Church  af 
fairs,  by  common  advice,  but  still 
under  the  government  of  the  Apostles, 
their  ordainers  and  overseers. 

"8.  But  when  the  Apostles  found 
that  quarrels  and  emulations  grew  in 
the  Church,  even  while  many  of  them 
were  living,  through  the  parity  of 

Presbyters,  and  side-takings  of  the 
people ;  the  same  Apostles,  by  the  ap 
pointment  and  direction  of  the  same 
Spirit,  raised  in  each  city  where  the 
Church  was  more  frequent,  one 
amongst  the  Presbyters  to  a  more 
eminent  authority  than  the  rest,  to 
succeed  them  in  their  ordinary  power 
of  ordination  and  censure,  and  en- 
charged  them  peculiarly  wit  h  the  care 
of  Church-government.  Such  were 
Timothy  and  \Titus,  and  those  which 
were  styled  the  Angels  of  the  seven 
Asian  Churches. 

"  9.  These  selected  persons  were 
then  and  ever  since  distinguished 
from  the  rest  by  the  name  Episcopi — 

"  10.  In  the  very  times  of  the  Apo 
stles,  and  by  the  imposition  of  their 
hands,  there  were  divers  such  persons 
settled  in  the  Church  of  God,  being 
severally  ordained  and  appointed  to 
the  oversight  of  those  populous  cities 
where  their  charge  lay,  to  whom  all 
the  Presbyters  and  Deacons  were  sub 

"11.  These  Bishops  continued  their 
fixed  superiority  over  their  clergy  all 
the  time  of  their  life,  with  the  well- 
allowed  express  of  spiritual  jurisdic 
tion  ;  and  after  their  death  other  Pres 
byters  were  chosen  to  succeed  them" 
(Bp.  Hall,  according  to  Prynne,  had 
originally  written,  '  were  succeeded  by 
others  of  their  own  order  and  degree ;') 
"  by  the  due  imposition  of  the  hands 
of  their  fellow-Bishops. 

"  12.  There  was  no  Church  of  Christ 
upon  earth,  ever  since  the  times  of  the 
Apostles,  governed  any  otherwise  than 
by  Bishops,  thus  successively  (after 
decease)  ordained. 

"  13.  This  course  of  government, 
thus  set  by  the  Apostles  in  their  life 
time,  by  the  special  direction  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  is  not  alterable  by  any 
human  authority,  but  ought  to  be  per 
petuated  in  the  Church  to  the  end  of 
the  world. 

"  14.  Those  which  in  the  New  Tes 
tament  are  called  the  Elders  of  the 
Church,  were  no  other  than  spiritual 
persons,  such  as  had  the  charge  of 
feeding  the  flock  of  Christ  by  word 
and  doctrine. 

"  15.  It  is  not  lawful  for  any  lay 
person  to  lay  hands  on  those  which 
arc  to  be  ordained,  nor  to  have  any 


by  human  laws,  in  those  things  which  are  but  incidents  to  Die 
their  calling ;  but  their  calling,  as  far  as  it  is  jure  divino,  by 
divine  right,  cannot  be  taken  away.  They  charge  further, 
( that  I  say  this  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England/ 
And  so  I  think  it  is.  For  Bp.  Bilson  set  out  a  book  in  the 
Queen's  time,  intituled,  '  The  Perpetual  Government^.'  And 
if  the  government  by  Bishops  be  perpetual,  as  he  there  very 
learnedly  proves  through  the  whole  book,  it  will  be  hard  for 
any  Christian  nation  to  out  it.  Nor  is  this  his  judgment 
alone,  but  of  the  whole  Church  of  England.  For  in  the 
preface  to  the  Book  of  Ordination,  are  these  words  :  '  From 
the  Apostles'  time,  there  have  been  three  orders  of  ministers 
in  the  Church  of  Christ,  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons  V 
Where  'tis  evident,  that  in  the  judgment  of  the  Church  of 
England,  episcopacy  is  a  different,  not  degree  only,  but  order, 
from  priesthood,  and  so  hath  been  reputed  from  the  Apostles' 
times.  And  this  was  then  read  to  the  Lords.  And  the  law 
of  England  is  as  full  for  it  as  the  Church.  For  the  statute 
in  the  eighth  of  the  Queen1,  absolutely  confirms  all  and 
every  part  of  this  Book  of  Ordination.  Where  also  the  law 
calls  it,  '  the  high  estate  of  prelacy.'  And  Calvin  (if  my  old 
memory  'do  not  fail  me),  upon  those  words  of  St.  John,  '  As 
my  Father  sent  Me,  so  send  I  you™,'  &c.,  says  thus  upon  that 
place,  Eandem  illis  imponit  personam  ac  idem  juris  assignat". 
And  if  our  Saviour  Christ  put  the  same  person  upon  the 
Apostles,  and  assigned  to  them  the  same  right,  which  His 
Father  gave  Him,  it  will  prove  a  sour  work  to  throw  their 
successors  the  Bishops  out  of  the  Church,  after  sixteen  hun 
dred  years'  continuance.  "  And  in  the  meantime  cry  out 
against  innovation."  For  either  Christ  gave  this  power  to 
His  Apostles  only ;  and  that  will  make  the  gospel  a  thing 
temporary,  and  confined  to  the  Apostles'  times :  or  else  He 
gave  the  same  power,  though  not  with  such  eminent  gifts,  to 
their  successors  also,  to  propagate  the  same  gospel  to  the  end 

hand  in  managing  the  censures  of  the  Church  of  England,  concerning  these 

Church,  which  only  pertain  to  them  points  of  Church-government."} 

who  have  the  power  of  the  keys  deli-  j  Bishop  Bilson's  Perpetual  Govern- 

vered  to  them  by  Christ.  ment.     [4 to.     Lond.  1593.] 

"16.  There  was  never  any  lay  Pres-  k  Book  of  Ordination,  Preface, 

byter  heard  or  read  of  in  the  Church  '  8  Eliz.  c.  1.  [§  3.] 

of  Christ  in  any  history,    until   this  m  S.  John  xx.  21. 

present  age.     All  which  we  declare  to  n  Calvin,  ibid.  [Op.,  torn.  vi.  par.  ii. 

he  the  doctrine1  and  judgment  of  the  p.  177.     Amst.  1(567.] 


Die  of  the  world,  as  St.  Paul  tells  us  he  did1,  Ephes.  iv.°     Now 

octavo.  ail  the  primitive  Church  all  along,  gives  Bishops  to  be  the 
Apostles'  successors ;  and  then  it  would  be  well  thought  on, 
what  right  any  Christian  state  hath  (be  their  absolute  power 
what  it  will)  to  turn  Bishops  out  of  that  right  in  the  Church 
which  Christ  hath  given  them2. 

IV.  The  fourth  charge  was  an  alteration  made  in  a  Brief,  for 
a  third  p  collection  for  the  distressed  ministers  and  others  in 
the  Palatinate.  The  Queen  of  Bohemia*1  was  pleased  to  do 
me  the  honour  to  write  to  me  about  this ;  and  because  two 
collections  had  been  before,  her  Majesty  desired  that  this 
third  might  be  only  in  London,  and  some  few  shires  about  it. 
I,  out  of  my  desire  to  relieve  those  distressed  Protestants,  and 
to  express  my  duty  to  the  Queen,  became  an  humble  suitor 
to  his  Majesty,  that  this  collection  also  might  go  through 
England,  as  the  rest  had  done.  And  'tis  acknowledged  by 
all,  that  this  I  did.  Now  the  witnesses  which  accuse  me  for 
some  circumstances  in  this  business  are  two. 

(210)  1.  The  first  is  Mr.  Wakerly  \  He  says,  'that  Mr. 
Ruly8'  (who  was  employed  by  the  Queen  of  Bohemia  about 
this  collection)  '  was  roughly  used  by  me  upon  occasion  of 
this  clause  put  into  the  Brief,  and  which  he  says  I  caused  to 
be  altered/  This,  first,  is  a  bold  oath ;  for  Mr.  Wakerly  was 
not  present,  but  swears  upon  hearsay.  Secondly,  what  kind-  377 
ness  I  showed  him  and  the  business  is  mentioned  before ;  and 
if  for  this  kindness  he  had  been  practising  with  Mr.  Wakerly 
about  the  Brief  (as  I  had  probable  reason  to  suspect),  I  can 
not  much  be  blamed  if  I  altered  my  countenance  towards 
him,  and  my  speech  too ;  which  yet  these  witnesses  (for  the 
other  agrees  in  this)  have  no  reason  to  call  rough  carriage, 
only  upon  Mr.  Ruly's  unthankful  report. 

He  says,  that  these  words,  '  the  Antichristiaii  yoke/  were 

1  ['as  St.  Paul  .  .  .  did/ in  margin.] 

2  ['For  either  .  .  .  them.'  on  opposite  page.] 

0  Ephes.  iv.  11.  James  I.,  wife  of  Frederick  V.  Elector 

i>  [This    was   in    1635.     See   Abp.  Palatine,  elected  in  1619  King  of  Bo- 

Luud's  Letter  to  his  Suffragans,  May  hernia.] 

8,  1635,  in  vol.  vi.     Collections  had  r  [Secretary  to  Sir  John  Coke,  Se- 

beeupreviously  ordered,  June  17, 1618,  cretary  of  State.  (Prynne,  Cant.  Doom, 

and  Jan.  29,   162|.    (Prynne,  Cant.  p.  391.] 

Doom,  p.  392.)]  3  [A  Palatinate  minister.] 
'i   [Elizabeth;    daughter    of    King 

Oi1  A11CHBISHOP  LAUD.  313 

left  out  l.  First,  this  is  more  than  I  remember  ;  and  the  Briefs 
I  had  not  to  compare  ;  nor  is  there  any  necessity,  that  two  Deeimo- 
Briefs  coming  for  the  same  thing,  with  some  years'  distance  octavo- 
between,  should  agree  in  every  phrase  or  circumstance. 
Secondly,  if  I  did  except  against  this  passage,  it  was  partly 
because  of  the  fore-recited  judgment  of  King  James,  of  which 
I  thought  his  sou  King  Charles  ought  to  be  tender:  and 
partly,  because  it  could  move  nothing  but  scorn  in  the  common 
adversary,  that  we  should  offer  to  determine  such  a  contro 
versy  by  a  broad  seal.  I  remember  well,  since  I  had  the 
honour  to  sit  in  this  House,  the  naming  of  tithes  to  be  due 
jure  divino,  cast  out  the  bill  ;  a  prudent  lord  asking  the  peers, 
whether  they  meant  to  determine  that  question  by  an  Act  of 
Parliament?  The  other  part  of  the  clause  which  they  say 
was  altered,  was  '  the  religion  which  we  with  them  profess  :' 
whence  they  infer,  because  f  with  them'  was  left  out,  that 
I  would  not  acknowledge  them  of  the  same  religion  ;  which 
follows  not.  For  we  may  be,  and  are  of  the  same  religion  ; 
and  yet  '  agree  '  not  with  them  in  those  opinions  in  which  we 
differ  from  them.  And  Mr.  Wakerly  confesses,  that  the  words 
as  altered,  are,  (  that  they  are  persecuted  for  their  religion  ;' 
and  their  religion  is  the  Protestant  religion,  and  so  is  ours. 
And  therefore  I  could  have  no  intention  to  make  the  religions 
different,  but  the  opinions  under  the  same  religion. 

"  For  Mr.  Wakerly,  he  is  a  Dutchman  born  ;  and  how  far 
the  testimony  of  an  alien  may  be  of  force  by  the  law,  I  know 
not  :  and  a  bitter  enemy  to  me  he  hath  ever  showed  himself, 
since  I  complained  to  the  King  and  the  Lords,  that  a  stranger 
born  and  bred,  should  be  so  near  a  Secretary  of  State,  and 
all  his  papers  and  cyphers,  as  he  was  known  to  be  to  Mr.  Se 
cretary  Coke  :  a  thing  which  few  States  would  endure  :  and 
how  far  the  testimony  of  such  a  cankered  enemy  should  be 
admitted,  let  the  world  judge.  Admitted  he 

1  [The  passage  said  to  have  been  these  religious  and  godly  persons  being 

altered   by  Laud,   is   given   thus   by  involved  amongst  others  their  country- 

Prynne  (Cant.  Doom,  pp.263,  392):  men,  might  have  enjoyed  their  estates 

"  Whose  cases  are  more  to  be  deplored,  and  fortunes,  if,  with  other  backsliders 

for  that  this  extremity  is  fallen  upon  in  the  times  of  trial,  they  would  have 

them  for  their  sincerity  and  constancy  submitted   themselves   to    the    Anti- 

in  the  true  religion,  which  we  together  Christian  yoke,  and  have  renounced  or 

with  them  do  profess,  and  which  we  dissembled  the  profession  of  the  true 

are  all  bound  in  conscience  to  maintain  religion."] 
to  the  utmost  of  our  powers  ;  whereas 


r>ie  2.   The  second  witness  was  Mr.  Hartlip.     '  He  acknow- 

ootavo.0  ledges  my  improvement  of  the  collection,  and  my  great  readi 
ness  therein  •'  which  doubtless  I  should  not  have  showed,  had 
I  accounted  them  of  another  religion.  He  says,  '  there  was 
no  alteration  but  in  that  clause,  and  that  implies  a  manifest 
difference/  But  that  is  but  in  his  judgment^  in  which  I  have 
already  showed  that  Wakerly  is  mistaken,  and  so  is  he. 
Beside,  he  comes  here  as  a  witness  of  the  fact,  not  as  a  judge 
of  my  intentions  or  thoughts  !.  He  adds, l  that,  if  he  remember 
well,  the  alteration  was  drawn  by  me/  But,  if  he  do  not 
remember  well,  what  then  ?  Surely  here 's  no  evidence  to 
be  grounded  upon  '  ifs/  Here  upon  the  point  of  Antichrist, 
Mr.  Nicolas  styled  me  as  before,  and  was  furious  till  he 
foamed  again  ;  but  I  saw  a  necessity  of  patience.  "  Mr.  Brown 
also,  in  his  summary  charge,  followed  this  business  close.  378 
But  I  gave  it  the  same  answer." 

The  fifth  charge,  and  the  last  under  this  article,  was  the 
calling  in  of  a  book,  an.  1637,  showing  the  doctrine  and  dis 
cipline  of  the  Church  in  the  Palatinate11;  '  but  called  in  only 
because  against  Arminianism/  The  single  witness,  Michael 
Sparks.  He  says,  (211)  '  this  book  was  called  in/  but  he  knows 
not  by  whom,  nor  mentions  he  for  what.  But  he  says,  '  the 
pursuivants  which  searched  for  it  were  mine/  He  means 
such  as  belonged  to  the  High-Commission ;  for  other  than 
such  I  had  none.  And  there  was  cause  enough  for  calling 
in  the  book,  without  thinking  of  Arminianism. 

"  But  what  is  the  reason,  why  here's  nothing  urged  against 
me,  about  abrogating  the  immunities  and  privileges  of  the 
French  and  Dutch  Churches,  which  fill  the  body  of  this 
article  ?  Why,  I  conceive  there  may  be  two  reasons  of  it. 
One,  because  there  was  taken  by  Mr.  Pryn,  among  other 
papers  for  my  defence,  a  letter  under  Queen  Elizabeth's  own 
hand x,  to  the  Ld.  Pawlet,  Marquis  of  Winchester,  then  Ld. 
Treasurer,  in  which  she  expresses  her  willingness,  that  those 

1  ['  or  thoughts.'  in  margin.] 

u  [The  title  of  the  book  is,  '  A  De-  swcr  to  the  Scotch  Articles.  [It  is  not 

claration  of  the  Ffaltzgraves ;  concern-  in  the  answer  to  the  Scotch  Articles, 

ing  the  Faith  and  Ceremonies  professed  but  in  the  answer  to  the  twelfth  Origi- 

iu  his  Churches.  Lond.  1637.']  nalArticlc  of  the  Commons  of  England. 

1  See  the  letter  above,  in  the  An-  Sec  vol.  iii.  pp.  424,  425.] 


strangers,  distressed  in  and  for  point  of  conscience,  should  Die 
have  succour  and  free  entertainment ;  but  should  conform 
themselves  to  the  English  Liturgy,  and  have  that  translated 
into  their  own  language.  And  they  knew,  I  would  call  to 
have  this  letter  produced,  proved,  and  read.  And  had  this 
letter  been  stood  unto,  they  had  never  been  able  to  do  the 
Church  of  England  half  the  harm  they  have  since  done. 
The  other  was,  because  they  found  by  their  own  search 
against  me,  that  all  which  I  did  concerning  those  Churches, 
was  with  this  moderation,  that  all  those  of  their  several  con 
gregations,  in  London,  Canterbury,  Sandwich,  Norwich,  or 
elsewhere,  which  were  of  the  second  descent,  and  born  in 
England,  should  repair  to  their  several  parish  churches,  and 
conform  themselves  to  the  doctrine,  discipline,  and  liturgy  of 
the  Church  of  England,  and  not  live  continually  in  an  open 
separation,  as  if  they  were  an  Israel  in  Egypt,  to  the  great 
distraction  of  the  natives  of  this  kingdom,  and  the  assisting 
of  that  schism  which  is  now  broke  forth  y.  And  as  this  was 
with  great  moderation,  so  was  it  with  the  joint  approbation 
of  his  Majesty  and  the  Lords  of  his  Council,  upon  the  reasons 
openly  given  and  debated :  and  all  this  before  T  proceeded  to 
do  anything.  As  appears  apud  Act  a." 

Then  they  went  to  the  tenth 1  Original  Article ;  which  here 
follows  : — 

He  hath  traitorously  and  wickedly  endeavoured  to  reconcile 
the  Church  of  England  with  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  for 
the  effecting  thereof  hath  consorted  and  confederated 
with  divers  Popish  priests  and  Jesuits,  and  hath  kept 
secret  intelligence  with  the  Pope  of  Rome,  and  by  himself, 
his  agents  or  instruments,  treated  with  such  as  have  from 
thence  received  authority  and  instruction :  he  hath  per 
mitted  and  countenanced  a  popish  hierarchy,  or  ecclesias 
tical  government,  to  be  established  in  this  kingdom.  By 
all  which  traitorous  and  malicious  practices,  this  Church 
and  kingdom  have  been  exceedingly  endangered,  and  like 
379  to  fall  under  the  tyranny  of  the  Roman  See. 

1  [This  was  printed  by  Wharton  '  thirteenth.'] 

y  I  The  paper  containing  these  suggestions  will  be  printed  from  the  copy  in 


Die  The  seventh  Additional  Article  :— 


ocuvo.  That  the  said  Archbishop  at  several  times  within  these  ten 

years  last  past,  at  Westminster,  and  elsewhere  ivithin  this 
realm,  contrary  to  the  known  laws  of  this  land,  hath 
endeavoured  to  advance  Popery  and  superstition  within 
the  realm.  And  for  that  end  and  purpose  hath  loittingly 
and  willingly  received,  harboured,  and  relieved  divers 
Popish  priests  and  Jesuits,  namely  one  called  Sancta  Clara, 
alias  Damport,  a  dangerous  person,  and  Franciscan  friar, 
who,  having  written  a  popish  and  seditious  book,  intituled 
Deus,  Natura,  Gratia,  wherein  the  Thirty-nine  Articles 
of  the  Church  of  England  established  by  Act  of  Parlia 
ment ,  were  much  traduced  and  scandalized ;  the  (21  &  said 
Archbp.  had  divers  conferences  with  him,  ivhile  he  was  in 
writing  the  said  book ;  and  did  also  provide  maintenance 
and  entertainment  for  one  Monsieur  S.  Giles,  a  Popish 
priest,  at  Oxford ;  knowing  him  to  be  a  Popish  priest. 

I.  The  first  charge,  they  said  ',  was  to  be  laid  as  a  foundation, 
and  it  was,  '  that  I  was  generally  reputed  a  Papist  in  heart, 
both  in  Oxford,  and  since  I  came  thence.' 

1.  The  first  witness  for  this  was  Dr.  Featly.  He  says, 
'  there  was  such  an  opinion  of  me  thirty  years  since  there/ 
But  he  says,  he  never  heard  any  popish  opinion  maintained 
by  me.  So  here  ;s  nothing  of  knowledge  :  and  if  I  should 
say,  that  above  thirty  years  ago  there  was  an  opinion,  that 
Dr.  Featly,  then  in  Oxford,  was  a  Puritan ;  this  could  make 
no  proof  against  him  ;  nor  can  his  saying  that  I  was  reputed 
a  Papist,  make  any  proof  against  me.  He  says  further,  '  that 
one  Mr.  Russel,  who  had  been  bred  in  S.  John's  College,  told 
him,  in  Paris,  that  I  maintained  some  Catholic  opinions/ 
First,  Mr.  Nicolas  would  have  it, '  that  this  Mr.  Russel  was  my 
scholar:3  but  that  the  whole  college  can  witness  it  is  not  so; 
nor  had  he  ever  any  relation  to  me,  in  the  least  degree.  After 
his  father's  death,  he  left  the  college,  and  went  beyond  sea; 
where  the  weak  man  (for  such  he  was)  lost  his  religion2. 
1  [Wharton  printed  'say.'] 

'  [George  Russell,  of  S.  John's  Col-  the  College,  but  retaining  in  his  hands 
lege,  elected  from  Merchant  Tailors'  the  College  money,  went  beyond  the 
School.  He  was  afterwards  Bursar  of  seas,  and  became  pensioner  to  the 

OF  ARCHBISHOP   LAUD.  317      • 

Secondly,   Dr.  Featly  says  expressly,   that  Mr.  Russel  said,  Die 
1 1  was  no  Papist  -'  which,  for  the  countenance  of  his  OAvn  octayo. 
change,  he  would  never  have  said,  had  he  thought  me  one. 
Thirdly,  if  he  did  say  that  I  maintained  some  Catholic  opinions, 
yet  he  named  none,  by  which  there  might  be  trial  and  judg 
ment,  whether  they  were  such  or  no,  in  the  sense  he  meant 
them  J.     Lastly,  Mr.  Perkins,  in  his  'Reformed  Catholic/  sets 
down  divers  opinions  in  which  they  of  Rome  and  we  agree  a : 
shall  he  be  a  Papist  for  this  ?     Or  shall  not  that  which  is 
lawful  for  him,  be  as  lawful  for  me  ? 

2.  The  second  witness  was  one  Harris b.  He  says,  'that 
Mr.  Ireland  c,  (who  was  some  time  student  of  Christ-Church 
in  Oxford,  and  after  schoolmaster  at  Westminster,)  '  told  him 
that  I  would  leave  the  Church  of  England/  This  is  a  bare 
report  from  Mr.  Ireland,  with  whom  I  never  had  any  ac 
quaintance,  nor  was  scarce  in  his  company  twice  in  all  my 
380  life.  Nor  is  it  in  my  power  to  hinder  what  Mr.  Ireland  will 
say,  or  Mr.  Harris  from  him.  He  says,  '  that  one  that  called 
himself  Leander  d,  came  over  on  purpose  to  make  this  recon 
ciliation/  If  he  did  (which  is  more  than  I  know  or  believe) 
I  think  he  would  hardly  make  such  a  one,  as  Harris  is 
reported  to  be,  acquainted  with  it.  But  howsoever,  if  he  did 
come  with  that  purpose,  was  it  in  my  power  to  hinder  his 
coming  ?  And  here  is  no  proof  offered  that  I  did  help  011 
his  purpose,  or  so  much  as  know  of  it.  He  says,  '  he  often 
petitioned  me  for  relief,  but  had  none/  It  may  be,  I  well 
knew  he  deserved  none  :  and  your  Lps.  know  that  by  law  I 
might  not  afford  him  any.  Had  I  given  him  any,  I  should 

1  ['in  the  .  .  .  them.'  in  margin.] 

Archduke  of  Austria,  and  a  man  of  d  [Father  Leander  &  S.  Martino. 

consequence  in  his  dominions.  (Wood,  His  proper  name  was  John  Jones, 

F.  O.  i.  281.)]  elected  from  Merchant  Tailors'  School 

n  [This  is  the  case  in  every  point  to  S.  John's  College,  Oxford,  in  1594 

which  he  discusses;  stating  first  the  (Wilson,  Merchant  Tailors'  School, 

agreements  and  then  the  differences.]  p.  1190),  not  1591,  as  stated  by  Wood 

b  [See  the  deposition  of  Francis  (Ath.  Ox.  ii.  603).  He  afterwards  be- 

Harris  in  Prynne,  Cant.  D  om,  pp.  came  a  Benedictine  monk,  and  Profes- 

411,  412.]  sor  of  Hebrew  at  Douay.  See  a  full  ac- 

c  [Eichard  Ireland  was  Master  of  count  of  his  life,  and  his  proceedings 

Westminster  School  when  Bishop  An-  in  England,  in  Butler's  Memoirs  of 

drewes  was  Dean,  and  Hac\et  one  of  English  Catholics,  vol.  ii.  p.  311,  and 

the  Scholars.  (Wood,  Ath.  Ox.  iv.  Dodd's  Church  History,  vol.  iii.  p.  112.1 


Die  now  have  heard  it  with  both  ears.     For  I  am  informed  lie  is 

Decimo-  .  -.    . 

octavo.       ft  priest,  and  condemned  m  ^jwaemunire,  and  was  let  out  oi 

prison,  on  purpose  to  be  a  witness  against  me  e.  And  having 
set  that  which  is  aforesaid  under  his  hand,  is  now  slipped 
away,  and  gone.  Who  got  him  out  of  prison  for  this  good 
purpose,  I  know  not ;  but  sure  somewhat  there  is  in  it,  for 
your  Lps.  see  his  testimony  is  now  read,  but  he  appears  not. 
3.  The  third  witness  was  Sir  Nathaniel  Brent f  (now 
absent,  but  came  in  the  next  day).  He  says,  '  I  was  esteemed 
popishly  affected  in  Oxford  ;'  and  he  gave  three  instances  very 
carefully,  to  prove  it.  The  first  was,  '  that  in  the  Divinity 
School  there,  I  maintained  the  necessity  of  baptism/  I  did 
so ;  and  my  predecessor  Archbishop  Abbot  was  then  Vice- 
Chancellor,  and  present,  and  approved  my  opinion •  and  my 
grace  passed  for  my  degree  to  be  Bachelor  of  Divinity  without 
any  one  man's  opposition  *.  He  says,  '  that  Mr.  Dale,  of 
Merton  College11,  then  showed  him  all  my  sup  (2 13)  position 
taken  out  of  Bellarmin.  This  is  a  bold  and  a  dangerous 
oath  :  he  might  swear  that  Mr.  Dale  showed  him  in  Bellarmin, 
that  which  he  said  was  my  supposition :  but  that  he  showed 
him  all  my  supposition  there,  is  a  strange  oath  for  a  man  of 
learning  and  law  to  make,  and  in  such  a  presence.  Besides, 
I  have  my  supposition,  which  I  then  made,  yet  by  me  ;  and 
if  my  tenet  of  that  question  be  the  same  with  Bellarmin's, 
or  that  there  be  any  line  taken  out  of  him,  but  what  I  cite 
for  my  own  advantage  against  him,  I  will  utterly  forfeit  my 
reputation  of  any  learning  to  your  Lps.  His  second  instance 
was,  '  that  I  was  acquainted  with  one  Mr.  Brown  *,  Fellow  of 
Corpus  Christi  College  in  Oxford,  who  was  suspected  to  be 
a  Papist,  and  after  his  death  proved  to  be  one  by  a  book  that 
was  found  in  his  study,  proving  that  a  man  might  be  a  Roman 
Catholic,  and  yet  go  to  Church  and  conform  in  England.' 
I  was  acquainted  with  this  man ;  he  was  a  very  good  scholar 
and  an  honest  man,  and  a  good  Protestant,  for  aught  I  know. 
For  the  tract  found  after  his  death  among  his  papers,  that's 

e  [Harris  had  been  released  from  e  [He  took  the  degree  of  B.D.  July 

prison  June  4,  1634,  by  Windebank's  6,  1604.     Abbot  held   his  Vice-chan- 

ineans.     (See  Prynne,  Hidden  Works,  cellorship  till  July  14.] 

1>.  123.)]  h  [Christopher  Dale,  his  colleague 

f    [Warden  of  Merton,  and  Vicar-  as  Proctor  in  1603.] 

General.     See  his  Life  in  Wood,  Ath.  '«    [Walter  Brown,  B.D.  April  <>,1606. 

Ox.  iii.  333.]  (Wood,  F.  O.  i.  317.)] 


no  proof:  for  scholars  get  all  the  papers  they  can,  especially  Die 
such  as  belong  to  their  own  profession.  And  the  more  strange 
the  opinions  are,  the  more  do  they  labour  to  get  them.  Nor 
is  it  any  proof  '  that  the  tract  was  of  his  making,  because 
written  in  his  own  hand/  as  'tis  urged.  For  the  argument 
being  so  foul  and  dangerous,  it  could  not  be  safe  for  him, 
nor  any  way  fit,  to  commit  it  to  any  other  to  write  for  him. 
Nor  is  there  any  proof  that  I  knew  he  had  such  a  tract  by 
him  ;  neither  indeed  did  I.  The  opinion  is  very  base  and 
381  unworthy,  and  was  first  broached  by  the  Jesuit  Azorius  k,  and 
it  seems  some  of  his  fellows  had  enlarged  him,  and  made  this 
tract  out  of  his  principles.  His  third  instance  was,  '  that  I  peti 
tioned  King  James  in  this  business/  I  was  complained  of  to 
King  James  by  a  great  person,  that  I  had  inward  acquaintance 
with  this  man.  Hereupon,  my  waiting  month  being  June, 
and  not  long  after  the  complaint  made,  I  took  occasion  in  my 
first  sermon  to  confute  this  opinion,  and  then  petitioned  his 
Majesty  that  it  might  be  examined,  that  such  an  imputation 
might  not  lie  upon  me.  His  Majesty  referred  it  to  the  Lords 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  Bishops  of  London,  Winchester, 
and  Duresm1;  where  after  full  examination  I  was  acquitted. 

The  second  charge  was,  that  the  same  opinion  was  held  of  II 
me  beyond  the  seas,  '  that  I  was  a  cunning  promoter  of  the 
Roman  cause/  And  here  the  witnesses  are  the  same,  which 
were  produced  before ;  Mr.  Challoner,  who  told  over  his  old 
tale  again  of  I  know  not  what  plot  he  heard  from  a  Jesuit  m : 
nothing  but  hearsay  at  the  best.  And  it  savours  like  an 
almanack  de  post  facto,  "  or  rather  of  somewhat  else,  which 
I  will  spare  to  name,  because  he  is  upon  his  oath."  The 
other  witness  is  Mr.  Anthony  Mildmay  n,  who  also  tells  over 
his  old  tale  of  his  Father  Fitton.  But  he  was  out  of  the  way 
again,  and'  appeared  not  till  the  next  day,  with  Sir  Nath. 
Brent.  So  here  's  a  repetition  again  of  the  same  witnesses, 
and  the  same  things,  to  multiply  the  noise.  "  Only  noble 
Sir  Henry  Mildmay  appeared  not  the  second  time;  but 

k  ["  Quinto  queeritur,  An,  ubi  Catho-  esse  per  se  malum."] — Instit.  Moral. 

Hc'LCumh£ereticisversantur,licitumsit  p.  i.  lib.  viii.  c.  27.  [p.  719.  Col.  Agr. 

Catholico  aclire  templa,  ad  quee  hsere-  1602.] 

tici  conveniunt,  eorum  interesse  con-          '  Abbot,  King,  Montague,  Neale. 
ventibus  atque  concionibus?    Respon-         m  [See  above,  p.  245.] 
deo,  si  rei  naturam  spectemus,  id  non          n  [See  above,  p.  246.] 


Die  whether  it  were  because  he  had  enough  at  his  first  appearance, 

o  cUvo°      or  whether  his  face  was  scratched  then  (as  since  men  say  it 

was)  I  cannot  tell." 

III.  The  third  charge  was,  'that  I  had  a  damnable  plot,  to 
reconcile  the  Church  of  England  with  the  Church  of  Rome/ 
If  to  reconcile  them  with  the  maintenance  of  idolatry,  it  were 
a  damnable  plot  indeed.  But  if  Christian  truth  and  peace 
might  meet  and  unite  together,  all  Christendom  over ;  were 
that  a  sin  too  ?  Were  I  able  to  plot  and  effect  such  a  recon 
ciliation,  I  would  think  myself  most  happy,  whatever  I  suf 
fered  for  it.  But  how  is  this  damnable  plot  proved  ?  '  Pope 
Gregory  writ  a  letter  to  his  nuncio  in  Spain  °,  and  a  letter 
also  to  King  Charles  P,  which  letter  is  printed  :  copies  of  these 
letters  were  found  in  my  study/  Could  I  hinder'  the  Pope 
from  writing  to  whom  he  pleased  ?  Shall  not  I  get  copies  of 
any  letters  I  can,  to  see  what  practising  is  abroad  for  private 
interest  ?  Shall  it  be  lawful  for  all  my  (214)  predecessors  to 
get  and  keep  copies  of  such  letters  by  them,  and  shall  it  be 
unlawful  for  me  only  ?  And  here  I  produced  Mr.  Dobson, 
an  ancient  servant  to  my  predecessors,  who  witnessed  that 
Archbishop  Bancroft  had  store  of  them,  and  kept  them  all  his 
time.  Nor  do  I  know  how  this  charge  can  fall  upon  me : 
for  there  is  no  one  word  in  any  of  the  letters  produced,  that 
reflects  upon  me,  or  any  plot  of  mine.  Nor  indeed  had  I 
ever  any  such  to  reflect  upon. 

JYt        The  fourth  charge  is,  'that  I  had  a  hand  in  the  plot  for 

sending  the  King,  when  he  was  a  prince,  into  Spain,  to  be 

perverted  in  his  religion/    They  follow  their  proof  of  this  out 

.    of  my  Diary  :  and  they  begin  with  my  friendship  with  the 

Ld.  Duke  of  Buckingham,  who  waited  on  the  Prince  in  this 

journey.     And  first  they  urged  my  Diary  at  June  9,  1622, 

where  I  mention  that  '  there  were  then J  particulars,  which  are 

not  for  paper4.1     But  the  words,  which  lead  these  in,  were  382 

his  entrance  upon  a  near  respect  to  me,  the  particular  expres- 

1  ['  there  were  then '  in  margin.] 

0  [See  this  letter  of  Gregory  XV.  to  Mcrcure  Francois,  torn.  ix.  anno  1623, 

the  Bishop  of  Cuen§a,  Inquisitor  Ge-  pp.  509,  510.     It  has   been   printed, 

neral  in  Spain,  '  from  the  copy  in  the  among   other  places,  in  Rush  worth's 

Archbishop's  study,'  in  Prynne's  Hid-  Collection,  vol.  i.  p.  78,  and  in  the  Cla- 

den  Works,  pp.  34,  35.]  rendon  and  Hardwick  Papers.] 

P  fPrynne    reprints  this  letter  in  i  [See  Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  139.] 
Hidden  Works,  pp.  36—38,  from  the 


sions  whereof  '  were  not  for  paper  :'  nor  word,  nor  thought  Die 
of  either  plot  or  f  popery/  Then  they  urged  June  15,  1622,  octavo. 
where  'tis  said,  that  I  '  became  C.'  that  is,  '  Confessor  to  the 
Ld.  Duke  V  First,  if  my  Ld.  Duke  would  honour  me  so  much 
as  to  make  me  his  '  confessor/  as  I  know  no  sin  in  it,  so  is  it 
abundantly  proof,  that  the  passages  before  mentioned  were 
not  for  paper.  Should  I  venture  them  so,  there 's  never  a 
person  of  honour  present,  but  would  think  me  most  unworthy 
of  that  trust.  Next,  they  pressed  June  13,  1623,  where  I 
confess,  that  'I  received  letters  from  my  Ld.  Duke  out  of 
Spain  s.  I  did  so ;  and  I  then  held  it  great  honour  to  me, 
and  do  so  still.  But  then,  and  long  before,  it  was  known  to 
all  men  whither  he  was  gone,  and  with  whom :  nay,  it  was 
commonly  known  to  all  men  of  quality  hereabout  within 
three  or  four  days :  and  till  it  was  so  commonly  known, 
I  knew  it  not.  Yea,  but  then  they  enforced  out  of  Feb.  17, 
162f,  that  the  f  Prince  and  the  Marquis  of  Buckingham  set 
forward  very  secretly  for  Spain  V  And  Feb.  21,  that  '  I  writ 
to  his  Lp.  into  Spain  V  'Tis  true,  they  went  away  that  day, 
and  very  secretly ;  but  I  neither  did,  nor  could  set  it  down, 
till  afterwards  that  I  came  to  know  it.  And  then,  so  soon 
as  I  came  to  know  it,  which  was  about  the  21st,  I  did  write. 
To  these  was  cunningly  "  (how  honestly  let  all  the  world 
judge)"  pieced  a  passage  out  of  a  letter  of  mine  to  Bp.  Hall x. 
But  that  letter  was  read,  at  my  humble  motion  to  the  Lords, 
and  the  date  of  it  was  in  1634  y.  So,  many  years  after  this 
business  of  Spain.  And  the  passage  mentioned,  was  only 
about  King  James  his  manner  of  defending  the  Pope  to  be 
Antichrist,  and  how  he  salved  it  while  the  Prince  was  in  Spain. 
But  King  James  related  it  after.  Nor  could  any  words  of  that 
letter  be  drawn  to  the  King's  going  thither,  much  less  to  any 
knowledge  I  had  of  it. 

The  fifth  charge  was  '  concerning  his  Majesty's  match  with   V, 
France.'     And  here  again  they  urge  my  Diary  at  Mar.  11, 
1625,    that  '  the  Duke  of  Buckingham  was  then  and  there 
employed2.'     And  at  May  19a,  and  29  b,  that  '  I  then  writ 

Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  139.] 

Ibid.  p.  142. 

'Ibid.  p.  141. 


;See  above,  p.  308.] 

LAUD.— VOL.    IV. 

The  letter  was  written  in  1639.] 

Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  162.] 


Ibid.  p.  163.] 


Die  letters  to  him.'     First,  my  Lords,  I  hold  it  my  great  honour, 


that  mv  Lord  Duke  would  write  to  me,  and  give  me  leave  to 

write  to  him.  Secondly,  I  have  committed  some  error  in 
these  letters,  or  none.  If  none,  why  are  they  charged?  If 
any,  why  are  they  not  produced,  that  I  may  see  what  it  is, 
and  answer  it  ? 

VI.  The  sixth  charge  was,  '  that  I  was  an  instrument  of  the 
Queen's/  This  they  endeavoured  to  prove  by  my  Diary  in 
three  places.  First,  at  Aug.  30,  1634.  '  Upon  occasion  of 
some  service  done,  she  was  graciously  pleased  to  give  me  leave 
to  have  immediate  access  unto  her,  when  I  had  occasion0/ 
This  is  true,  and  I  most  humbly  thanked  her  Majesty  for  it : 
for  I  very  well  knew  what  belonged  to  addresses  at  second 
hand  in  court.  But  what  crime  is  in  this,  that  the  Queen 
was  pleased  to  give  me  access  unto  her,  when  I  had  occa 
sion  ?  Here  '&  no  word  of  religion.  Secondly,  at  May  18, 
(215)  1635,  where  'tis  said,  that  'I  gave  her  Majesty  an 
account  of  something  committed  to  me  d/  If  her  Majesty 
sent  or  spake  to  me  to  do  anything,  as  it  seems  she  did,  shall 
I  want  so  much  duty  as  to  give  her  an  account  of  it  ?  So 
belike  I  must  be  unmannerly  with  her  Majesty,  or  lie  open 
to  no  less  than  a  charge  of  high  treason.  Thirdly,  at  April  3,  383 
1639.  'Tis  made  a  great  matter,  ( that  I  should  then  despatch 
a  great  business  for  the  Queen,  which  I  understood  she  would 
not  move  for  herself/  and  that  '  for  this  her  Majesty  gave 
me  great  thanks e/  Mr.  Nicolas  his  inference  upon  this, 
was,  '  that  they  conceive  wherefore/  But  his  conceit  makes 
no  evidence  :  he  must  not  only  conceive,  but  prove  wherefore, 
before  it  can  work  anything  against  me.  As  for  religion,  as 
there  is  no  word  of  it  in  my  Diary,  so  neither  was  it  at  this 
time  thought  on.  Her  Majesty  would  therein  have  moved 
for  herself.  But  it  seems  it  must  be  a  crime  if  I  be  but  civil 
and  dutiful  towards  the  Queen,  though  it  be  but  thrice  men 
tioned  in  so  many  years. 

VII.  The  seventh  charge  was,  that  '  I  forbad  ministers  praying 
for  the  Queen's  conversion,  and  punished  others/  The  first 
witness,  Mr.  Ratcliff f,  says,  '  that  Sir  Nath.  Brent  gave  it 

c  [Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  222.]  f  [Hugh  Ratcliffe,   of  S.  Martin's, 

d  [Ibid.  p.  223.]  Ludgate.     (See  Prynnc'a  Cant.  Doom, 

•••  [Ibid.  p.  232.]  p.  420.)] 


in  charge  at  Bow  church  in  my  visitation/  The  more  to  Die 
blame  he,  if  so  he  did.  Yea,  but  he  says,  '  it  was  by  my 
command  delivered  unto  him  by  Sir  John  Lambe/  Was  it 
so  ?  How  doth  Mr.  Ratcliff  know  that  ?  He  doth  not 
express.  He  was  not  present,  when  I  spake  with  Sir  John 
Lambe.  And  if  Sir  Nathaniel  Brent  told  him  of  it,  'tis  but 
hearsay.  And  Sir  Nathaniel  having  been  so  ready  a  witness 
against  me,  why  is  he  not  examined  to  this  particular  ?  And 
as  for  the  paper  which  was  showed,  it  appears  plainly  there, 
that  it  was  no  paper  of  '  instructions '  sent  to  my  visitors  by 
me,  but  of  particular  informations  to  me^  :  of  which  one  was, 
'  that  the  Queen  was  prayed  for  in  a  very  factious  and  scan 
dalous  way/  And  this  appeared  when  that  paper  was  read. 
And  this  I  referred  to  my  visitors,  as  I  not  only  might,  but 
ought :  not  forbidding  the  prayers,  but  the  scandalous  manner 
of  them.  The  second  witness  was  Mr.  Pryn.  Who  says,  '  that 
one  Mr.  Jones  was  punished  for  praying  for  the  Queen11/  He 
was  punished  in  the  High-Commission  for  scandalous  abusing 
the  Queen,  under  a  form  of  praying  for  her,  and  for  divers 
other  articles  that  were  against  him.  "And  this  answer  I 
gave  to  Mr.  Brown,  who  forgot  not  this  in  summing  up  my 

The  eighth  charge  was,  '  that  I  punished  men  for  praying  VIII, 
to  preserve  the  Prince/  Now,  God  forbid.  The  High- 
Commission  book  was  showed,  and  that  there,  in  the  year 
1631,  one  Mr.  Howe  was  censured  for  it1.  I  got  this  act  of 
the  High-Commission  to  be  read  to  the  Lords  :  his  prayer 
went  thus,  ( that  God  would  preserve  the  Prince  in  the  true 
religion,  of  which  there  was  cause  to  fear/  Could  this  prayer 
have  any  other  operation  upon  the  people,  than  to  make 
them  think  his  Majesty  was  careless  in  the  education  of  the 
Prince,  especially  in  point  of  religion  ?  And  this  was  so 
grievous  and  graceless  a  scandal  cast  upon  a  religious  King, 
as  nothing  could  be  greater.  Upon  the  matter,  it  was  the 
show  of  a  prayer  for  the  Prince,  but  was  indeed  to  destroy 
the  King  in  the  hearts  of  his  people.  And  had  I  not  there 
consented  to  his  punishment,  I  had  deserved  to  be  punished 

s  [See  Prynne's  Cant,  Doom,  p.  418.]  *  [John  Howe,  of  Loughborough,  in 

h  [William  Jones,  a  Gloucestershire  Leicestershire.     (See   Prynne's   Cant. 

Minister    (Prynne's   Cant.   Doom,   p.  Doom,  p.  420.)     He  was  the  father  of 

420).]  the  celebrated  Puritan  divine.] 

Y   2 


Die  myself.     f<  Mr.  Brown,   when   he  repeated  the  sum  of  the 

octavo.       evidence,  laid  this  charge  home  upon  me,  but  spake  not  one 
word  (to  my  remembrance)  of  this  answer  given  to  it." 

IX.  The  ninth  charge,  '  that  I  did  extol  Queen  Mary's  days.' 
The  proof  for  it  was  taken  out  of  the  Preface  to  the  Statutes 

of  the  University  of  Oxford.  I  took  a  great  deal  of  pains  384 
about  those  statutes,  and  might  justly  have  expected  thanks 
for  it,  not  such  an  accusation.  But  as  for  the  Preface,  it 
was  made  and  printed  at  Oxford :  I  meddled  not  with  it k. 
I  could  trust  the  University  with  little,  if  not  with  the  making 
of  a  (216)  preface.  If  they  have  done  anything  amiss  in  it, 
let  them  answer  it.  The  passage  was  about  certain  offers 
made  to  amend  those  confused  old  statutes,  both  in  Ed.  VI. 
and  Qn.  Mary's  days ;  but  no  effect  came  of  the  pains  then 
taken ;  Recruduit  labor,  says  the  Preface.  So  that  this  I  can 
answer  for  them :  there  's  not  a  word  spoken  of  religion,  but 
of  manners  only,  and  that  as  much  in  relation  to  the  times 
of  princes  following,  as  hers.  For  the  words,  to  my  remem 
brance,  are,  Interim  optanda  temporum  felicitate  *,  &c.  And 
that  interim  cannot  be  restrained  to  Queen  Mary's  days 
only,  but  must  include  the  whole  interim,  or  middle  distance 
of  time  to  that  present  in  which  I  settled  the  whole  body  of 
their  statutes,  that  is,  all  Queen  Elizabeth's  and  King  James 
his  days ;  which  I  think  no  man  can  deny  was,  optanda 
temporum  felicitas  l. 

X.  Here  Mr.  Nicolas  confessed  there  was  '  no  downright  proof 
against  me.     That  was  his  phrase :  but  he  added,  that  was 
not  to  be  expected  in  such  a  work  of  darkness.     Then  he 
c  produced  a  paper  found  in  my  study,  printed  at  Rome  *V 
So  were  divers  of  my  books  printed  there  :  what  of  this  ? 

1  ['For  the  words,  .  .  .  temporum  felicitas.'  on  opposite  page.] 

k  [The  Preface  was  written  by  Brian  resarcivit  innatus  candor ;  et  quicquid 

Twyne.    But  the  words  complained  of,  legibus    deerat,    moribus    suppletum 

Wood  says,,  were  inserted  by  another  est."] 

hand.     Annals,  p.  392.]  m  [A     description    of   this    paper 

1  [The  passage  is  the  following: —  '  printed  at  Home'  is  found  in  Prynne's 
" Paulo  post  potiente  rerura  Maria,  sub  Cant.  Doom,  pp.  421,  422.  It  con- 
Card  inalis  Poli  auspiciis  idem  recru-  tained  the  Conclusiones  Theologicee  of 
duit,  labor,  novse  exinde  datae  leges,  sed  Ludovicus  a  Sancta  M  aria,  (an  English 
pari  cum  prioribus  angustia.  Interim  friar  named  Morton,  or  Kerton,  then 
tamen,  inter  incerta  vacillans  statuta,  residing  at  Kome.)  The  paper  was 
viguit  Academia,  colebantur  studia,  dedicated  to  Card.  Barberino,  as  the 
enituit  disciplina  ;  et  optanda  tempo-  protector  of  the  English  nation.] 
rum  felicitate,  tabularum  dcfectus 


They  may  print  what  they  will  at  Rome,,  I  cannot  hinder  it :  Die 
and  I  may  have  and  keep  whatever  they  print,  no  law  for- 
bidding  it.  Then  '  he  showed  a  letter  sent  unto  me  from 
Mr.  Graves11.  The  gentleman  is  at  this  present  Fellow  of 
Merton  College  in  Oxford,  a  great  traveller,  and  a  man  of 
great  worth.  As  far  as  I  remember,  his  letter  came  to  me 
from  Alexandria.  It  was  fit  to  be  sent,  and  kindly  received  ; 
as  by  me  it  was.  I  desired  it  might  be  read.  Then  were 
mentioned  '  Sir  William  BoswelPs  letters,  and  the  papers 
sent  by  Andreas  ab  Habernfeld,  about  a  great  plot  to  destroy 
the  King  and  religion,  and  that  I  concealed  these  papers/ 
"  I  might  have  been  amazed  at  the  impudence  of  this  charge 
above  all  the  rest.  Diaboli  impudentia,  the  devil's  impudence, 
and  no  less,  as  S.  Augustin  speaks  in  another  case0."  Did  I 
conceal  these  papers  ?  First,  the  same  day  that  1  received  them, 
I  sent  them  by  an  express  to  his  Majesty.  I  had  a  speedy 
answer  from  his  Majesty,  and  that  I  returned  with  equal 
speed  to  his  Majesty's  agent,  Sir  Wi.  Boswell,  as  I  was  com 
manded.  And  this  Mr.  Pryn,  and  Mr.  Nicolas  knew.  For 
Mr.  Pryn  took  all  these  letters  and  papers  from  me,  when 
he  searched  me  at  the  Tower ;  and  out  of  them  made  his  book 
called  '  Rome's  Masterpiece  P  :'  "  excepting  the  slanders,  which 
he  hath  juggled  in  of  his  own."  So  soon  as  his  Majesty 
came  home,  I  humbly  besought  him,  that  he  would  be  pleased 
to  appoint  a  time,  and  call  some  Lords  to  him  to  hear  and 
examine  the  business,  and  this  examination  continued  till 
I  was  committed.  What  was  after  done,  I  cannot  account 

n  [This  letter  by  John  Greaves  men-  quarto.  A  copy  whereof  being  by  his 
tions  that  Cardinal  Barberino  was  endeavours  conveyed  to  the  Arch- 
about  to  edit '  Fastidius,  de  Vita  Chris-  bishop,  then  a  prisoner  in  the  Tower, 
ti ana,' and  dedicate  it  to  King  Charles  the  Archbishop  wrote  notes  in  the 
I.  The  letter  was  written  from  Leg-  margin  of  it,  so  far,  and  so  much,  as 
horn.  (See  Prynne's  Cant.  Doom,  to  vindicate  himself  from  the  asper- 
p.  421.)  Greaves  was  appointed,  No-  sions  laid  upon  him  therein.  This 
vember  14, 1643,  Savilian  Professor  of  copy  with  the  said  notes  is  now  in  the 
Astronomy,  and  was  ejected  by  the  hands  of  that  knowing  and  learned 
Parliamentary  Visitors,  October  30,  antiquary,  Mr.  Anthony  Wood  ;  which 
1618.]  having  been  by  him  communicated  to 

0  [S.  Augustine  is  speaking  of  the  me,  I  have,  with  his  leave,  transcribed 

pertinacious  appeals  of  the  Donatists.  the  Archbishop's  notes,  and  caused 

His  exact  words  are  :"  Puto  quod  ipse  them  to  be  adjoined  to  these  papers 

diabolus  .  .  .  non  esset  tarn  impudens,  concerning  the  plot  discovered  by 

ut  in  ea  causa  persisteret."] — S.  Aug.  Andrew  ab  Habernfeld,  reprinted  in 

Epist,  clxvii.  [Ixxxix.  Ben.  §  3.  Op.,  the  following  collection.— H.  W.  [See 

torn.  ii.  col.  330.  A.]  below.  In  a  former  note  it  was  stated 

P  This  book  was  published  by  Pryn  that  these  papers  would  be  reprinted 

in  the  year  1643,  in  five  sheets  in  in  vol.  vi.] 


Dio  for.     Besides,  my  Lords,  it  appears  by  those  papers,  that  my 

octavo10  l*fe  was  souSnt  for,  because  I  would  not  give  way  to  the  385 
change  of  religion  ;  and  Mr.  Pryn  himself  hath  printed  this ; 
and  yet  now  Mr.  Nicolas,  from  his  testimony,  presses  these 
papers  against  me.  But  the  King,  and  the  Lords,  and  both 
Secretaries  of  State  then  present,  can  witness,  that  I  took  all 
the  care  and  pains  above-mentioned,  to  have  it  sifted  to  the 
bottom.  "  Notwithstanding  all  this,  Mr.  Nicolas  falls  upon 
this  plot  again  upon  the  next  day  of  my  hearing,  as  if  nothing 
had  been  said  unto  it :  and  was  so  shameless,  as  to  say,  '  that 
I  followed  this  business  so  long  as  I  thought  the  plot  was 
against  the  Puritans :  but  so  soon  as  I  found  it  was  against 
the  Papists,  I  kept  it  secret,  till  Mr.  Pryn  discovered  it  in  his 
search  of  my  papers.'  Where,  first,  there 's  no  one  word  in 
all  the  papers  to  make  me,  or  any  man,  think  the  Puritans 
were  concerned  in  it.  And,  secondly,  I  did  not  sleep  upon 
the  receipt  of  these  papers,  till  I  had  sent  them  to  his 
Majesty.  But  I  had  reason  to  keep  the  papers  as  safe  as 
I  could,  considering  how  much  they  justify  me  against  these 
foul  calumnies  put  upon  me." 

XI.  Then  followed  the  charge  of  Sancta  Clara's  book,  alias 
Monsieur  St.  Giles :  so  they  expressed  it ;  and  I  must  follow 
the  way  they  lead  me.  1 .  First,  then,  they  charge  '  that  I  had 
often  conference  with  him,  while  he  was  writing  his  book 
intituled,  Deus,  Natura,  Gratia  q/  No,  he  never  came  to  me 
till  he  was  ready  to  print  that  book.  Then  some  friends  of 
his  brought  him  to  me.  His  suit  then  was,  that  he  might 
print  that  book  here.  Upon  speech  with  him,  I  found  the 
scope  of  his  book  to  be  such,  as  that  the  Church  of  England 
would  have  little  cause  to  thank  him  for  it  :  and  so  absolutely 
denied  it.  Nor  did  he  ever  come  more  at  me  after  this,  but 
twice  or  thrice  at  most,  when  he  made  great  friends  to  me, 
that  he  might  print  another  bo ->k,  to  prove  that  bishops  are 
by  divine  right1'.  My  answer  then  was,  that  I  did  not  like 

•i  [The  title  of  the  book  is,  '  Deus,  an   English   missionary.      Davenport 

Natura,  Gratia,   &c.  .  .  .  ubi  ad  truti-  went  also   by  the  names  of  Francis 

nam  Fidei  Catholicse  examinaturCon-  Hunt  and  Francis  Coventrv.     (Wood, 

fessio  Anglicana.    Lugd.  1634.'     The  Ath.  Ox.  iii.  1221.)] 

author  was    Francis  a  Simcta  Clara,  r  [This    appears    to    be   the   book 

whose  real  name  was  Christopher  Da-  which  he  printed  at  Cologne,  in  164u, 

venport.  He  was  originally  of  Merton  under  the  title,  '  Apologia  Episcopo- 

College,  but  joined  the  order  of  Fran-  rum.'] 
ciiicaus  in  1617,  and  at  length  became 


the  way  which  the  Church  of  Rome  went,  in  the  case  of  Die 
episcopacy.  And  howsoever,  that  I  would  never  give  way, 
that  any  such  book  should  be  printed  here  from  the  pen  of 
a  Romanist ;  and  that  the  bishops  of  England  were  able  to 
defend  (2 1 7)  their  own  cause  and  calling,  without  calling  in 
aid  from  Rome ;  and  would  in  due  time.  Maintenance  he 
never  had  any  from  me,  nor  did  I  then  know  him  to  be  a 
priest.  Nor  was  there  any  proof  so  much  as  offered  in  con 
trary  to  any  of  this  s. 

2.  Secondly,  they  did  specially  except  '  against  a  passage 
in  the  licenser,  and  another  at  the  end  of  the  book  V     The 
book  was  printed  at  Lyons,  where   I  could  not  hinder  the 
printing,  either  of  the  whole  or  any  part.     This  might  have 
been  something,  had  I  licensed  it  here  ;  but  that  I  constantly 

3.  Thirdly,  they  produced  a  letter  written  to  me   from 
Venice,  by  one  Mr.  Middleton  u,  Chaplain  there  to  the  right 
honourable  the  now  Earl  of  Denbigh  x,  his  Majesty's  ambas 
sador.     Therein  he  writes,  'that  S.  Clara  was  homo  nequis- 
simus,  and  that  one  Monsieur  S.  Giles  was  the  author  of  that 
book/     That  Clara  and  S.  Giles  were  the  same  person,  is  but 
Mr.  Middleton's    opinion.      Such  news   as  he  there  heard, 
some  true,  some  false,  he  thought  fit  to  write  unto  me  :  and 
he  being  absent,  here's  no  proof  upon  oath,  that  they  are  one 
and  the  same  person.    And  I  hope  a  young  man's  letter  from 
Venice,  or  any  other  place,  signifying  only  such  things  as  he 

386  hears,  shall  not  stand  for  good  evidence  in  a  case  of  life. 
And  he  was  mainly  deceived  in  this  particular,  as  appears : 
First,  because  what  Clara  is,  I  know  not :  but  Monsieur  S.Giles 
is  a  great  scholar,  and  a  sober  man ;  and  one  that  gave  the 
late  Lord  Brooke  y  so  good  content,  that  he  allowed  him  one 
hundred  pound  a  year  during  his  life.  Secondly,  because  'tis 
commonly  known  that  Clara  is  an  Englishman,  and  S.  Giles 
a  Frenchman  born  and  bred.  Thirdly,  because  their  own 

8  [See  another,  but  similar  account  Cant.  Doom,  pp.  429,  430.] 

by  the  Archbishop  of  his  connexion  x  [Basil  Feilding,  the  second  Earl  of 

with  S.  Clara,  in  Prynne's  Cant.  Doom,  Denbigh.    He  succeeded  his  father  in 

p.  427.]  the  title,  April  8,  1643.     See  his  cha- 

*  [The  passages   excepted  against  racter  in  Clarendon,  Hist,  liebell.  vol. 

are  given  in  full  in  Prynne's  Cant.  v.  p.  74.] 

Doom,  pp.  424 — 426.]  y  [Robert    Greville,    second     L<jrd 

,  u  [Prynnc  gives  this  letter  at  length,  Brooke.] 


Die  Article  %  upon  which  they  bring  this  charge,  acknowledges 

octavo.0  them  two  distinct  persons.  "  Fourthly,  because  both  Mr. 
Pryn  and  Mr.  Nicolas  had  Monsieur  S.  Giles  before  them 
in  examination,  and  could  not  but  know  him  to  be  a  French 
man.  As  appears  by  a  warrant  given  to  him  by  Mr.  Pryn  to 
secure  him  after  his  examination.  Which  warrant  follows  in 
these  words : 

ft  These  are  to  certify  those  whom  it  may  concern,  that  the 
Committee  of  the  House  of  Commons,  appointed  to  prose 
cute  the  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  have  examined  and 
received  satisfaction  from  Monsieur  S.  Giles,  a  domestic 
servant  to  the  Resident  of  Venice ;  and  therefore  he  is  no 
further  to  be  examined  or  molested  concerning  the  same. 

"  This  licence  came  to  my  hands  since  my  answering  was 
past;  so  I  could  not  then  show  it.  M.  S.  Giles  was  never 
the  man  that  gave  me  notice  of  any  of  this ;  not  so  much  as 
that  he  had  been  examined :  but  my  secretary,  Mr.  Dell, 
came  to  hear  of  it  by  chance,  and  went  to  him,  and  had  this 
copy  (with  some  labour)  from  him,  and  will  make  oath  it  is  a 
true  copy.  This  is  not  the  thankfullest  part  that  ever  S.  Giles 
played,  considering  my  carriage  towards  him." 

4.  Then  they  charged  upon  Monsieur  S.  Giles  directly, 
'  that  I  knew  him  to  be  a  priest,  and  yet  maintained  him  at 
Oxford/  The  case  was  thisa :  Mr.  S.  Giles  was  in  good  place 
about  the  Queen's  Majesty  at  her  first  coming  :  here  he  did 
so  good  services  to  this  State,  that  he  lost  himself  in  France, 
and  durst  not  go  thither  when  the  French  were  sent  away. 
All  this  while  the  man  was  unknown  to  me,  till  his  Majesty 
one  day  at  S.  James's  told  me  this,  and  that  he  was  a  priest, 
and  that  it  lay  upon  him  in  honour  to  allow  him  some  main 
tenance  ;  and  prescribed  me  a  way  how  to  order  it,  that  he 
might  receive  one  hundred  marks  a  year  as  from  him  :  and 
gave  me  charge,  if  the  pension  were  at  any  time  behind, 
I  should  acquaint  him  with  it.  After  this,  M.  S.  Giles  by  his 
friends  petitioned  his  Majesty,  that  being  a  stranger,  he 

*  The  seventh  Additional.  was  now  produced  and  read  before  the 

*  The  Archbishop  related  this  case  Lords.     It   may  be  found   in  Pryn's 
more  at  large,  and  therewith  defended  Compl.  Hist.  [Cant.  Doom,]  p.  428.-- 
himself   in   a  written  paper ;    which  II.  W. 

being  seized  by  Pryune  in  the  Tower, 


might  live  in  Oxford,  to  have  the  use  of  the  library  there,  Die 
being  resolved  to  meddle  (218)  no  more  with  the  controversies 
of  the  time ;  but  to  apply  himself  to  metaphysical  learning. 
His  Majesty  was  desirous  to  have  him  placed  in  some  college, 
to  save  charges  :  but  this  I  most  humbly  deprecated,  because 
it  might  be  dangerous  to  the  youth  there,  and  scandalous  to 
his  Majesty,  the  Church,  and  the  University;  and  dangerous 
to  myself,  being  Chancellor.  To  the  rest  I  submitted :  so  he 
was  left  to  place  himself  in  some  town  house,  as  he  could. 
387  And  for  this  his  Majesty  gave  me  his  warrant,  which  Mr.  Pryn 
in  his  search  took  from  me.  But  here  follows  the  true  copy 
of  it  :— 

Charles  R. 

Canterbury)  Mr.  S.  Giles  by  serving  us  and  this  State, 
hath  lost  all  his  hopes  in  France,  and  desires  to  spend  his 
time  here  at  his  private  studies.  I  would  have  you  think 
upon  some  way  for  his  maintenance,  and  to  place  him  in 
Oxford,  that  he  may  have  use  of  that  library,  which  he 
much  desires.  And  you  may  so  order  it,  that  his  profes 
sion  in  religion  may  do  no  harm. 

And  according  to  this  direction  of  his  Majesty,  I  did  take 
order ;  but  with  assurance  from  himself,  and  with  spies  upon 
him  there,  beside  the  special  care  of  the  Vice-Chancellor,  that 
he  should  not  converse  with  young  students,  nor  exercise  his 
priestly  office,  nor  do  anything  against  the  laws.  Nor  did 
I  ever  hear,  that  he  failed  in  any  of  these  assumptions. 

5.  Then  they  produced  one  Mr.  Broad,  who  testified,  '  that 
while  S.  Giles  lived  at  Oxford,  some  Doctors  came  to  him  V 
Doctors  were  able  to  deal  well  enough  with  him ;  but  all 
resort  of  young  scholars  was  forbidden.  He  says  further, 
'  that  M.  S.  Giles  should  say,  that  the  bishops  of  England 
were  cordially  of  his  religion,  but  that  he  feared  their  rigidness 
would  spoil  all/  First,  this  is  but  a  report  of  his  speech. 
Secondly,  why  was  not  S.  Giles  at  his  examination  asked, 
whether  he  said  it  or  no  ?  And  if  he  did,  what  ground  he 
had  for  it  ?  At  the  most,  'twas  but  his  opinion  of  the  bishops, 
who  were  never  the  more  cordial  to  Popery,  for  his  thinking 

b  [Broad  particularly  specified  Dr.      Caut.  Doom,  p.  428.)] 
Turner,   and    Dr.  Johnson.    (Prynne, 


Die  so.     "And  thirdly,  I  doubt  it  appears  by  this  time,  that  all 

octavo0  i§  overthrown,  or  near  it,  not  by  the  rigidness,  but  by  the 
over-remissness  of  some  bishops,  who  never  would  believe  any 
danger  could  come  from  the  '  godly/  as  they  were  called." 

6.  Lastly,  what 's  the  reason  of  this  great  endeavour,  upon 
nothing  but  news  in  a  letter  ],  to  make  S.  Clara,  and  Mr. 
S.  Giles,  to  be  one  and  the  same  man  ?  "  Doubtless,  nothing 
but  an  hydropical  thirst  after  my  blood."  For  resort  of 
priests  to  Lambeth  was  usual  in  both  my  last  predecessors' 
times,  Bancroft's  and  Abbot's.  And  some  lay  in  the  house 
and  had  relief.  This  was  proved  to  the  Lords  by  two  ancient 
servants  of  that  house.  Neither  of  which  have  been  done  in 
my  time.  Arclibp.  Abbot  made  a  warrant  (this  warrant  was 
showed 2)  to  secure  Mr.  Preston,  an  English  priest c,  upon  a 
command  d  of  King  James e :  why  may  not  I  a  French  one, 
by  the  warrant  of  King  Charles  ?  King  James  justified 
Bishop  Bancroft  for  doing  this,  when  he  was  Bp.  of  London, 
and  no  privy  counsellor :  and  may  not  I  do  it,  being  Archbp. 
and  privy  counsellor,  with  as  much  privity  of  the  King  and 
the  State,  as  he  did  ?  But  to  let  these  pass,  why  should  I 
say,  here  was  a  thirst  for  blood  ?  Fll  tell  you  why  ?  The 
statute  of  27  Eliz.  makes  it  '  felony  without  benefit  of  clergy, 
to  maintain  or  relieve  any  Romish  priest  born  in  England, 
or  any  other  of  her  Majesty's  dominions,  knowing  him  to  be 
suchV  Now  they  had  laid  their  Article  &,  that  I  had  given 
main(219)tenance  to  Monsieur  S.  Giles,  a  popish  priest  at  388 
Oxford,  knowing  him  to  be  such.  But  when,  upon  examina 
tion  of  S.  Giles,  they  found  him  to  be  a  Frenchman,  and  so 
not  within  the  statute — (as  the  words  of  that  statute  are 
most  plain,  and  so  is  Sir  Edw.  Coke's  judgment  upon  them11, 

1  ['  upon  nothing  ...  a  letter/  these  words  underlined.] 

2  [ '  (this  .  .  .  showed)'  in  margin,  as  a  note.] 

c  [Father  Preston  had  written  seve-  ton's  condition  in  prison,  and  a  letter 

ral  books  in   defence  of  the  Oath  of  of  Abp.  Abbot  to  the  Attorney-General 

Allegiance,  under  the  name  of  Roger  in  favour  of    some  Romish    priests, 

"Widdrington.     See  a  memoir  of  him  in  Rushworth's  Collections,  vol.  i.  pp. 

in  Dodd's  Church  History,  vol.  ii.  p.  241—243.] 

420.]  f  27  Eliz.  cap.  2.  §  3. 

d  Confer,  at  Hamp.   Court,  p.  51.  *  Art.  7.  addit. 

[Lond.  1604.]  h  Lib.  iii.  Instit.   cap.  37.    [p.  101. 

e  [See  a  statement  relating  to  Pres-  Lond.  1648.] 


botli  which  I  then  read  to  the  Lords) — I  say,  when  they  saw  Die 
this,  then  they  cast  about  how  to  make  S.  Clara  and  Mr. 
S.  Giles  to  be  one  man  i.  And  though  they  could  find  no 
shadow  of  proof  of  a  thing  that  is  not,  but  a  '  letter  of  news 
from  Venice/  "yet  against  their  own  knowledge  and  con 
science,  they  give  that  in  evidence  to  reach  my  life  any 

Here  Mr.  Nicolas,  so  soon  as  he  discovered  whither  I 
tended,  would  have  broken  me  off,  saying,  they  did  not  urge 
it  for  that  now,  they  were  not  yet  come  to  it.  I  replied,  if 
they  came  to  it  after,  I  would  be  at  the  pains  to  answer 
again  :  but  since  it  concerned  my  life,  I  would  not  slip  it 
now,  nor  leave  it  unanswered  in  any  circumstance.  So  I 
went  on,  but  they  never  mentioned  it  after ;  and  by  this  way 
meant  certainly  to  have  involved  me  within  the  la\v,  Clara 
being  an  Englishman  born.  "  God  of  His  mercy  grant,  that 
this  thirst  after  my  blood  lie  not  too  heavy  another  day  upon 
their  souls,  Mr.  Brown  in  summing  up  the  charge,  fell  upon 
this  also.  I  made  a  brief  answer  out  of  that  which  is  afore 
said  :  yet  after,  in  his  reply,  he  fell  upon  this  letter  of  Mr. 
Middleton's,  and  cites  his  news  for  evidence,  that  Sta.  Clara 
and  Mr.  S.  Giles  were  the  same  man.  Which  I  much  wonder, 
so  able  and  grave  a  man  as  he  is,  should  swallow  from  Mr. 
Pryn,  who  doubtless  (being  present)  was  angry  to  see  himself 
so  laid  open  in  the  House  of  Commons." 

At  List  came  in  the  last  charge  of  this  day :  '  That  a  cardi-  XII. 
nal's  hat  was  offered  unto  me.'  My  Diary  quoted  for  this, 
at  Aug.  4,  and  21,  1633  k.  I  could  hinder  no  offer,  unless 
I  could  prophesy  what  each  man  came  about,  and  so  shun 
them.  But  why  is  not  my  answer  there  set  down,  expressed 
too  ?  My  answer  was,  '  That  somewhat  dwelt  in  me,  which 
would  not  suffer  me  to  accept  that,  till  Rome  were  other  than 
now  it  is.'  Besides,  I  went  presently  to  his  Majesty,  and 
acquainted  him  with  it :  which  is  all  that  the  law  requires  at 
rny  hands  *.  And  his  Majesty  very  prudently  and  religiously 

1  After  all,   Pryn  would  insinuate,  hath  the  confidence  at  last  (p.  430)  to 

that  S.  Giles  was  the  same  man  with  add,  that  'it  is  most  apparent.' — H.W. 

Saucta  Clara,  and  wrote  the  book  inti-  k  [Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  219.] 

tuled,    '  Deus,   Natura,  et  Gratia,'   al-  l  Sir  Ed.  Coke,  lib.  iii.  Instil,  e.  3. 

though  he  fully  knew  the  contrary,  [p.  36.  Lond.  1G48.     Where  it  is  said 

Compl.  Hist.  pp.  427,  429.     Nay,   he  to  be  mispmioii  of  treason  to  conceal 


Die  (yet  in  a  calm  way,  the  persons  offering  it,  having  relation  to 

octavo.0"  s°nie  ambassador)  freed  me  speedily  of  that,  both  trouble 
and  clanger.  They  urged  further  out  of  the  papers  of  Andreas 
ab  Habernfield  (which  Mr.  Pryn  took  from  me  in  his  search), 
'  that  Signior  Con  m  had  power  to  offer  me  a  cardinal's  hat/ 
The  words  which  they  cite,  are  (for  I  could  never  get  sight  of 
those  papers  since),  Mandatum  habuit  off  err  e,  sed  non  obtulit n. 
What  power  he  had  to  make  me  such  an  offer,  I  know  not ; 
but  themselves  confess  he  did  not  offer  it.  Nor  had  I  ever 
any  speech  with  him,  during  all  the  time  he  stayed  here. 
I  was  solicited  as  much  by  honourable  friends  to  give  him 
admittance  to  me  at  Lambeth,  with  assurance  he  should  speak 
nothing  about  religion,  as  ever  I  had  about  anything  in  my 
life '.  I  still  refused,  and  could  not  persuade  myself  to  do 
other ;  and  yet  could  not  but  inwardly  (in  verbo  sacerdotis, 
this  is  true 2)  condemn  myself  of  gross  incivility  for  refusing.  389 
For  which  yet  now  I  see  I  am  much  bound  to  God  for  that 
unmannerliness.  Had  I  held  a  correspondence  with  him, 
though  never  so  innocent,  where  had  I  now  been  ?  Besides, 
I  would  not  have  it  forgotten,  that  if  { to  offer  a  cardinal's 
hat/  or  any  like  thing,  shall  be  a  sufficient  cause  to  make  a 
man  guilty  of  treason,  it  shall  be  in  the  power  of  any  Romanist 
to  make  any  English  bishop  a  trai(220)tor  when  he  pleases  : 
a  mischief  not  to  be  endured.  And  thus  this  long  and  tedious 
day  ended ;  and  I  had  order  to  attend  again  on  July  24,  which 
I  did  accordingly. 

1  ['as  ever  1  ...  my  life.'  in  margin.] 

2  ['  (in  verbo  ...  is  true)'  as  a  marginal  note.] 

a  Bull,  and  that  in  case  of  treason  in-          m  [The  Pope's  nuncio.] 

formation  should  be  given  to  the  King          n  [See  Rome's  Master-piece,  p.  586 

as  soon  as  possible.]  in  marg.] 




THIS  day  they  went  on  with  the  same  Article.     And  the  Die 
first  charge  was,  f  my  denying  the  Pope  to  be  Antichrist  :'  the 

proofs;  '  the  alteration  of  the  clause  in  the  letters  patent  for  Julii  24, 
the  Palatinate  ;  and  the  letters  between  Bp.  Hall  and  me/  Wednes- 
These  proofs  are  answered  before  a,  and  repeated  here  only  to  dav- 
make  a  noise.     Nor  did  I  in  any  of  these  deny  the  Pope  to 
be  Antichrist.     For,  to   forbear  that  word,  for   some   both 
temporal  and  ecclesiastical  respects,  is  one  thing  ;   and  to 
deny  the  thing  itself  is  another. 

The  second  consists  of  a  great  many  particulars,  and  most      II. 
of  them  urged  before,  repeated  only  to  help  to  make  the 
ignorant  clamorous  and  wild  against  me.     God  forgive  them 
this  practice. 

1.  The  first  particular  was  Shelf  ord's  book:  '  The  whole 
Book  V     And   Mr.  Pryn  very  gravely  said,  that  '  this  book 
and  the  other  two  following,  were  found  in  my  study/     Is  he 
not  yet  ashamed  of  this  argument?     May  I  have  no  book  in 
my  study,  but  I  must  be  of  the  same  judgment  with  the 
author  in  all  things  ?     The  author  is  altogether  unknown  to 
me.      The  book  was  licensed  at  Cambridge.      So  nothing 
faulty  in  me,  but  the  having  of  the  book  in  my  study. 

2.  The  second  was,  Dr.  Heylin's  book  against  Mr.  Burton. 
This  book  was  printed  by  my  command  (they  say),  '  and  in  it 
is  a  passage  for  absolute  obedience  to  kings/  p.  129  c.     This 
was  before  also.     And  I  did  command  the  printing  of  the 
book  ;  but  gave  no  warrant  to  put  anything  unjustifiable  into 
it.     This  passage  I  caused  to  be  read  to  the  Lords,  and  the 
Doctor  there  says  no  more  than  what  he  learned  of  King 
James  in  the  Conference  at  Hampton  Court  d.  But  if  anything 
be  amiss,  he  is  ready  to  answer  it.     But  I  find  not  one  word 

a  [See  above,  pp.  308.  312.]  brief  and  moderate  answer  to  the  se- 

b  [The  title  of  the  book  is,  '  Five  ditious  and  scandalous  charges  of 

pious  and  learned  Discourses,  by  Rob.  Henry  Burton,'  £c.]  p.  129.   [Lond. 

Shelford,   of   Ringsfield    in    Suffolk,  1637.] 

Priest.  Camb.  1635.']  (1  [As  quoted  by  Heylin  in  the  pas- 

c  Heylin,  cont.  Burton,  [/.  e.  '  A  sage  referred  to  above.] 


Die  in  him,  that  this  absolute  obedience  ought  to  be  in  any- 

thing  that  is  against  law.     "  That 's  one  of  Mr.  Nicolas  his 

3.  The  third  particular  is  Bp.  Mountague's  Appeal,  p.  141 c. 
But  nothing  hence  charged  upon  me,  but  only,  that  the  book 
was  found  in  my  study.     I  would  Mr.  Pryn  could  find  any 
books  there  now. 

4.  The  fourth  was,  '  That  divers  books  of  like  nature  were  39( 
licensed  by  my  chaplains/     But  none  was   of  all  they  then 
named,  but  Dr.  Heylin's,  and  Sales'  ;  of  which  your  Lps.  have 
heard  the  plot  how  it  came  to  be  licensed f .    And  for  Dr.  Heylin, 

he  is  ready  to  make  all  good,  which  he  hath  therein  done. 

5.  The  fifth  particular  is,  that  the    Homilies   which  are 
authorized  in  the  Church  of  England,  '  make  the  Pope  Anti 
christ,'  p.  216°  j  '  and  the  Babylonish  beast  of  Rome/  p.  316  h. 
But,  first,  this  is  nothing  against  me,  till  it  be  proved  (which 
yet  is  not  done),  that  I  have  positively  denied  the  Pope  to  be 
Antichrist.     And,  secondly,  I  do  not  conceive,  that  the  Ar 
ticle  of  the  Church  of  England *,  which  confirms  the  Homilies, 
doth    also    confirm    every  phrase    that  is   in    them.      Nor, 
thirdly,  do  I  conceive  that  the  Homilies  in  those  places  which 
are  cited,  do  make  the  Pope  '  the  great  Antichrist.'     For,  in 
the  first  place,  the  words  are,  ( to  the  beating  down  of  sin, 
death,  the  Pope,  the  devil,  and  all  the  kingdom  of  Antichrist :' 
which  words   cannot  possibly  imply,  that  the  Pope  is  that 
Antichrist.    In  the  second  place,  he  is  only  called  the  '  Baby- 
lonical  beast  of  Rome  /  which  phrase  doth  not   necessarily 
signify  '  the  great  Antichrist/     For  the  beast  so  often  men 
tioned  in  the  Revelation  k,   is  nowhere  called  the  '  Baby  lonical 
beast  of  Rome.'     And  if  that  beast  do  stand  for  the  '  great 
Antichrist/  (I  say  '  if/  because  those  Scriptures  are  very  dark,) 
then  the  beast  is  primarily  the  Roman  empire  in  the  judg 
ment  of  the  Geneva  noters l.     And  that  there  should  be  two 
great  Antichrists   is   more   than   any  man  hath  yet   said l. 

1  ['  Nor,  thirdly, .  .  .  hath  yet  said.'  on  opposite  page.] 

e  ['  Appello  Ceesarcm,'  &c.  p.  141.          h  [Horn,  against  Wilful  Rebellion, 

Loncl.  1625.     Mountague  here  main-  par.  vi.  p.  510.] 
tains  that  the  Pope  is  not  Antichrist.]          5  Art,  35.  Eccl.  Ang. 

f  [See  above,  p.  286.]  k  Cap.  xi.  7. 

«  [Horn,  for  Whit-Sunday,  par.  ii.          '  Annot.  in  Apoc.  xvii.  8. 
p.  398.  Oxf.  1814.] 


Here  Mr.  Nicolas  was  up  again  with  '  pander  to  the  whore  of  D 
Babylon/  and  his  other  fonl  language ;  "  not  remembering 
all  this  while  (which  yet  I  was  loth  to  mind  him  of),  that  one 
of  his  zealous  witnesses  against  the  '  whore  of  Babylon/  and 
all  her  superstitions,,  got  all  his  means  (which  are  great)  by 
being  a  pander  to  other  lewd  women ;  and  loved  the  business 
itself  so  well,  as  that  he  was  (not  long  since,  men  say)  taken 
in  bed  with  one  of  his  wife's  maids.  Good  Mr.  Nicolas,  do 
not  dispense  with  all  whores,  save  the  whore  of  Babylon." 

6.  The  sixth  particular  was,  '  the  Articles  of  Ireland,  which 
call  the  Pope  the  Man  of  Sinm/     But  the  Articles  of  Ireland 
bind  neither  this  Church  nor  me.     And  some  learned  Pro 
testants  do    not    understand  (221)  that  noted  place  of  the 
Apostle,  2  Thess.  ii.  n,  as  meant  of  Antichrist,  or  the  Pope. 

7.  The  seventh  and  last  particular  is,  a  repetition  of  Sancta 
Clara  and  Mr.  S.  Giles;  and  the  '  letter  of  news'  (which  were 
news  indeed),  '  to  make  them  one   man  /   though  this  were 
answered  at  large  but  the  last  day  ° ;  and  Sir  Ed.  Hungerford's 
testimony  brought  up  again  P.     It 's  a  sign  Mr.  Nicolas  hath 
indeed  no  '  downright 1   proof '  (as  he   said  before),  that   so 
tumbles  up  and  down  in  repeating  the  same  things. 

The  third  charge  is,  that  I  say  in  my  book,  'That  the  reli-  III 
gion  of  the  Church  of  Rome  and  ours  is  all  one  *.'  This  is 
spoken  only  in  opposition  to  other  religions,  in  regard  of 
Christianity.  The  words  are,  '  Nor  do  the  Church  of  Rome 
and  the  Protestants  set  up  a  different  religion ;  for  the  Chris 
tian  religion  is  the  same  to  both/  &c.  And  the  like  passage 
to  this  is  in  my  speech  in  the  Star-Chamber r.  And  these 
passages  were  read  to  the  Lords.  So  that  either  Papists  must 
391  be  denied  to  be  Christians,  or  else  this  charge  can  work 
nothing  against  me. 

The  fourth  charge  is  out  of  Chuneus  his  book,  pp.  45  and  46 s,    IV. 

1  [This  is  written  in  MS.  '  downright  right/  apparently  by  mistake.] 

111  [Articles  agreed  upon  in  the  Con-  s  [The  title  of  the  book  is,  '  Col- 
vocation  at  Dublin,  1615,  Art.  Ixxx.—  lectiones  Theologicarum  quarundam 
Wilkins,  Cone.  torn.  iv.  p.  453.]  Conclusionum  ex  diversis  authorum 

u   2  Thess.  ii.  sententiis    perquam   breves    sparsim 

0  [See  above,  p.  327.]  excerpts   opera  et  industria  Thomee 
P  [See  above,  pp.  277,  278.]  Chounci   de  Alfristonio  in  Comitatu 

1  My  bookcont.  Fisher,  p.376.  [§  39.  Sussexiae  Armigeri.  Lond.